Dr David Southall - The Man Behind the Myth

For the last 10 years, David Southall has been subject to revolving door complaints from the anti-msbp.com group. David though is misunderstood by the great majority of the public and the media. David and I have a lot in common. He acts much the same as a whistleblower would. While I have some protection in raising concerns, Dr David Southall doesn't seem to have any protection.

The first time I came across David Southall was in a corridor at North Staffordshire NHS Trust. He always impressed those around him with his charisma and his charm. I was of course a junior doctor then but there is a lot you can tell about a person from the way they deal with others. David Southall was a respected doctor. All parents liked him. They also reported that he was one of the most kindest and caring doctors at the hospital. This is shown by the recent parents who commented in the Sentinel. They stated

"I have to say when my daughter was ill 4 years ago Prof Southall was a very caring and understanding doctor especially during the time of disagnosis which was a very scary time.My daughters condition was a chronic condition of which the pain was a major feature. I cannot comment on other situations but i can only be eternally grate ful to him for my daughters recovery"

JULIE, ABBEY HULTON

"Dr Southall treated my daughter who had severe learning difficulties. I found him to be a sincere man who treated my daughter with respect and had a genuine concern for her wellbeing unlike some other consultant who dismissed her and would not take the time to know her. It would be a loss if he could not practise anymore" Sally, Stoke on Trent

Of course, I knew all there was on the grapevine and David was never cited as the kind of doctor portrayed in the media. His paediatric unit was renowned and he was known for his detailed work in accordance to protocol. He ran his team to provide patients with the highest standard of care.

As time moved on and I gradually got older, I noticed David's name in the newspapers. I could never understand why such a highly respected doctor was criticised in this manner. I then came across Penny Mellor in the early 2000. A brash campaigner who knew how to knock doors down by making quite flamboyant allegations. The more flamboyant the allegations, the more likely the police or the authorities would investigate. Penny and I initially got on until I discovered that there was no evidence base for her accusations. It was at that point that I realised that David Southall was the subject of a witch hunt.

David's account of the harassment he has suffered is harrowing to say the least. For 10 years he has tolerated the behaviour of Penny Mellor, a woman with a vendetta against him and one with little in the way of knowledge to justify any investigations that have taken place. Defending these fairly complex allegations of this lady takes some doing for the innocent. I found this out first hand when Mellor complained about me to the GMC. The complaint of course was thrown out in the end but not without some extensive effort from me.

David's fate and mine run parallel due to Professor Rod Griffiths. Professor Rod Griffiths as Director of Public Health was negligent in investigations regarding both our cases. Professor Griffith's slipshod methodology and biased assessment was detimental to both of us.

Of course, it is too late for the public to believe or to give David Southall the opportunity to defend himself. The only victim in these cases is David Southall. I believe no one knows why they dislike David Southall anymore, nor do they care about giving him the benefit of the doubt. No one has ever given David Southall a chance to defend himself nor do they wish to hear him. Child Protection is a complex speciality and raising concerns is part of the job. Doctors cannot always be right but they certainly have to be able to raise concerns.


This is what I recently wrote to one of the newspapers.

"Raising concerns in a situation like child protection is very similar to whistleblowing. Whistleblowing should be a qualified situation. Doctors and other health professionals should have the freedom to raise concern about patient safety without being placed at risk of investigation. If there is a risk of conduct proceedings, this not only has implications on child protection professionals but on any health professional in the UK who wishes to raise concerns regarding patient safety. It is impossible for every whistleblower to always be right. Each whistleblower only has access to the data at a certain point in time. A decision to raise the concern has to be made in the interests of safety of the patient on the data available at the time. It is unreasonable to expect the whistleblower to have access to ALL data, records etc. Investigations may find that the whistleblower was wrong but this does not mean that the whistleblower who raised the issue in good faith should be taken down the conduct route by their regulatory body. If this is so no whistleblower would raise the concern thereby placing patients at risk. Potential investigations by the regulatory body will effectively deter bona fide whistleblowers. This was not within the recommendations in the Bristol Inquiry.

If we compare the situation of whistleblowers to child protection professionals, they perform the same function. Court decisions are based on many factors but at present the expert seems to be scapegoated. It seems that the child protection professional who raises the concern in good faith is then referred to the regulatory body because the court decision did not support the expert's view. This is similar to a negative investigation finding on concerns raised by a whistleblower. This cannot be right because like the whistleblower, the expert raised their concerns and their views in good faith i.e. there was no malice. In the interests of patient safety it is vital that raising concerns is placed in a qualified and protected situation. It is also important that doctors and other health professionals are free to raise their concerns without fear from their regulatory body. I am sure the public would not prefer the option of Dr Steve Bolsin opting not to raise his concerns regarding the high death rate in his hospital. If the regulatory body is viewed as oppressive in the case of child protection professionals then this sends the message to each potential whistleblower that they should not raise their concerns. If this is so, there will never be a next Dr Steve Bolsin. Deterring whistleblowing is an unacceptable situation that will compromise patient safety"

I hear the news each day about how doctors wrongly accused mothers. In a protected situation like child protection every specialist has to have the freedom to raise their concerns. Without it, the vulnerable would be placed at risk.

If we take this matter in perspective, while the Trust spent 1 million on dealing with the vexatious complaints against David Southall, patients died on Ward 87 due to lack of funding. Funds were deviated from those patients by Penny Mellor and her crew. One could even say that Penny Mellor and her associates were indirectly responsible for the deaths on Ward 87. No concern of hers was upheld by the Trust so it progressed to the GMC.

Anyhow, we call this justice lite.


Overall, I am fortunate to have known someone like David Southall. I believe him to be kind, honest and honourable. Above all, he has always placed his patients first - that is the child. I don't think the public could expect anything less. Many may judge my view but I know David Southall, the man. I also know that amongst many doctors who are arrogant, evasive, ignorant - David is none of those things. He is modest, softly spoken, witty and considerate. The problem of course is that the media refuses to know him and the public refuses to listen to him.


I also believe that his patients and the medical profession should stand by him through this traumatic phase. The phase that the General Medical Council dubbed a totalitarian regime has put him through. No doctor deserves what has been meted out on him. The cost has been high for him both personally and professionally but David has always never given up and will continue to fight to clear his name. That is something we must always admire. Amongst the doctors from North Staffordshire NHS Trust who should have been struck of such as Professor Monica Spitieri, Dr David Southall was not one of them. Monica who knew about the substandard care on Ward 87 did nothing to improve it. Monica's case at the GMC was thrown out because the General Medical Council is of the view that she should be Professor at Keele [ having cost the lives of many] and David Southall should be struck off. There was nothing that Monica did that was in the interests of her patients. That was why she was side lined out of clinical work and placed into research. Thats what they do with all negligent doctors. I believe the GMC have subjected me to more investigations for the material I write than any doctor who ran Ward 87.

Related Links

Professor Was Highly Regarded by Patients.