Why Say Sorry!?

Dr Sean Connery. Scottish SpR

Shaken and Stirred
Plaice was seen encircling him.
A flash of fin was spotted

While Jobbing Doctor and Witchdoctor are being highly intellectual, I felt I ought to concentrate on pure unadulterated anatomy. Dr Sean Connery, our SpR who has allegedly been allegedly suspended by the actions of an alleged London Dean due to his alleged comments on GMC Committee member who is allegedly called Carol Black. We ought to say that the GMC has already been dubbed a totalitarian regime by Harris HHJ [ the judge in my 2004 case]. This therefore includes Carol Black as GMC Trustee who failed to respond to any of my communication about silencing doctors. All pieces of the jigsaw tend to fit together as all fishes swim in the same totalitarian pond.

I was called yesterday and told that Dr Sean Connery has grovelled and apologised to the entire world, all their dogs, cats and gold fish. Has anyone ever trained junior doctors to stand up for their rights? Clearly not. Isn't being fearless in the makeup of junior doctors these days? In any case, Sean is Scottish and one would think the Highland, some short bread and a kilt would inspire him to gain some steel balls.

Jesting aside, I am going to write about something that most doctors should listen to.

An apology is an admission unless you phrase the apology right. The medical world advertises this " You must apologise and all will be forgiven". Well, this is what the defence union advised the doctor I know. The apology was then upheld by the General Medical Council as an "Admission" of " wrong doing". I discussed the various Good Medical Practise rules as of 2006. What you do does not have to be a risk to the patient, for the GMC to take it up. This is because they have no definition of Serious Professional Misconduct. Hopefully, there will be a definition following the next matter in court related to me so matters like this will not be taken up. Subsequently Trusts and Deaneries will also have some guidance.

Anyway, the doctor I knew, apologised, the complainant withdrew the complaint but the GMC still moved the complaint forward then held the apology against his name. This they said was evidence of guilt and the doctor ended up with a warning.

The other problem with an apology - is the impact on any future litigation. An apology is an admission of liability, undermining any avenue of litigation that Sean wishes to take. I have no idea who advised him but clearly he wanted a short cut way out without causing too much distress and it may well work. It may work for him but may not work for the next person.

I am sure Sean is good looking - but its important not to act following a knee jerk reaction as it makes the matter spiral out of control. Admission means liability, liability means guilt, guilt means the Deanery/Trust etc will take it up and play their game.

The worst thing to do within a suspension is to admit anything.

In my view, Sean should have stood his ground and fought for his rights and not placed any future litigation etc in jeopardy. We don't even know what the GMC is going to do - why give them rope? He should have been proud of his written post and placed it online for the world to see. In the end, if Black wants to sue for defamation, she can. What she or Elizabeth Paice are not allowed to do is use Deaneries and Trusts as a short cut to address matters they are uncomfortable with.

Alternatively, if you are going to apologise, just don't say the insulting or critical material in the first place. It is no excuse to say " I did it in the heat of the moment" - anything written on the internet is a record. If anyone asked me to apologise for what I write, I never would but I would fight for my human rights right to the end, no matter what the cost. Like our friend Sean, the GMC took my posts and writings on NHS Exposed and used them against me as "critical material". They then disliked critical letters I wrote to the GMC. Following that, they didn't like the way I made a typographical error. After that, my blog was targetted because I had linked to something they were uncomfortable with. I though never apologised for any of it. None of it was upheld.

There are times to apologise. There are times not to apologise. The important aspect is to think long term about the repercussions of an apology. Sean needed to have a think of the 360 degree result of an apology. A considered and measured action is always required, not one done in a frenzied terror.

Lastly, one should never apologise to those who abuse human rights. It also gives the top level pigs precedent to do the same thing to every doctor in the UK. They can now remove the postings, obtain an apology and make each junior doctor grovel and dance to their tune. It is essentially a cheaper route to resorting to the law and doing it the right way.