Respect - Paice Has to Earn ItI understand from the blogsphere that most people with tame vocabulary have given Dr Scot Jnr rather a frosty reception. We are still unclear whether the post referred to Carol Black or Professor Paice. She writes "The extracts from the posting which concerned me particularly are as follows". Depending where the emphasis it placed, it may have concerned Paice herself or Carol Black. The entire post was not provided by the GMC despite being appended by Elizabeth Paice. We are waiting for the entire post. This is what Dr Scot Jnr stated.
"As a representative of the medical profession you represent, at best, a mendacious, avaricious self serving career power chaser with many psychopathic personality traits and at worst a malignant, destructive, ignoble, dishonourable empty husk of soiled humanity…… You may also wish to think about inserting your immaculate portfolio up your anal orifice…... … it is about time you shut your malignant, shit encrusted stoma of a mouth and fucked off to your witches' bastard palace and pontificated to a coven of shitbags more receptive to your line of thinking...”
Now, we should get certain matters in perspective here, the laws of the land dictate that free speech is absolute. The case law does not support Professor Paice. The legal directive is discussed here.
This is the case law
"REDMOND-BATE Appellant - and -DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS Respondent Case No: CO/188/99
The quote is
"Free speech includes not only the inoffensive but the irritating, the contentious, the eccentric, the heretical, the unwelcome and the provocative provided it does not tend to provoke violence. Freedom only to speak inoffensively is not worth having. What Speakers’ Corner (where the law applies as fully as anywhere else) demonstrates is the tolerance which is both extended by the law to opinion of every kind and expected by the law in the conduct of those who disagree, even strongly, with what they hear. From the condemnation of Socrates to the persecution of modern writers and journalists, our world has seen too many examples of state control of unofficial ideas. A central purpose of the European Convention on Human Rights has been to set close limits to any such assumed power. We in this country continue to owe a debt to the jury which in 1670 refused to convict the Quakers William Penn and William Mead for preaching ideas which offended against state orthodoxy"
The problem for Elizabeth Paice is that free speech gives Dr Scot Jnr a very very wide berth. Over the years, hundreds of young doctors have had the same thoughts and haven't said anything. The problem with Dr Scot Jnr's remark is that he was essentially right.This is a excellent description of the current upper echelons of power. It could be applied to any of them. To demand politeness, Paice has to have acted with fairness over the years. The above order of words is nothing compared to the lives she has ruined over the years. This is no simple issue, Paice has purposely, maliciously and vindictively ruined doctors lives and there has been no accountability for it. Black seems to have done the same with the MMC.
I believe doctors who lead a fairly cushy existence forget about what it is like to have your rights violated. So, I would stand by each of the sentences written by Dr Scot Junior, I would also defend his right to say it. In a world that lacks accountability, if Dr Scot Jnr had not said it, the issue of violation of human rights of doctors would not be at the forefront. Seniors have happily carried on their merry way. The above is a frustrated outpourings of a doctor who knew there was no accountability or process of accountability for any senior's actions. This is what people do when there are no more options left. It is evidence that the doctors are not happy with the current system. They are also fed up of being trapped and having their careers used as a sword of democles each time they say something to defend themselves.
Did Elizabeth Paice/Black care about any of the doctors who had fallen by the wayside courtesy of the MMC? Of course, they didn't. It is clear that Paice apparent "shock" at the above comments is nothing compared to the "shock" suffered by many many doctors over the years. These are the doctors who have been powerless to defend themselves against her. She should ask herself what she did about all the dead patients on Ward 87. Did they find it a "shock" to be found dead because she sat back and did nothing?
Will the GMC protect her? Probably - they hunt on here for my representations of the issue constantly. That is of course absolutely fine because I break most norms that exist within GMC Towers. I suspect I am rather different, I am a hybrid between being Indian and English. I don't value politeness in the absence of actual action. I don't value facades and I don't think any doctor should be "nice" to Professors until they start developing some insight into the repercussions of their actions. If Dr Scot Jnr had said the above in India, no one would judge him. They do judge him in the UK, with a fine yardstick of how the establishment expect doctors to behave. The public expect doctors to stand up for them and against the violation of human rights.
There are some people in life who don't deserve to be treated with respect. They have to earn that respect not demand it. Paice/Black have yet to earn the respect of junior doctors.
It is a great shame that so many people give up so easily. Then that is because the medical profession sleeps. That is why Paice gets away with all abuses of power because everyone fears to tread but prefers to take the line of political correctness.
I believe doctors who lead a fairly cushy existence forget about what it is like to have your rights violated. So, I would stand by each of the sentences written by Dr Scot Junior, I would also defend his right to say it. In a world that lacks accountability, if Dr Scot Jnr had not said it, the issue of violation of human rights of doctors would not be at the forefront. Seniors have happily carried on their merry way. The above is a frustrated outpourings of a doctor who knew there was no accountability or process of accountability for any senior's actions. This is what people do when there are no more options left. It is evidence that the doctors are not happy with the current system. They are also fed up of being trapped and having their careers used as a sword of democles each time they say something to defend themselves.
Did Elizabeth Paice/Black care about any of the doctors who had fallen by the wayside courtesy of the MMC? Of course, they didn't. It is clear that Paice apparent "shock" at the above comments is nothing compared to the "shock" suffered by many many doctors over the years. These are the doctors who have been powerless to defend themselves against her. She should ask herself what she did about all the dead patients on Ward 87. Did they find it a "shock" to be found dead because she sat back and did nothing?
There are some schools of thought that say that we should forget what Paice did, move on as they feel it won't make a difference. That is of course one school of thought but a different school of thought is that the right to free speech is worth defending. There were ways that Paice could have dealt with matters out of hours had she felt uncomfortable about the post, she could have asked for its removal and she could have defended herself/or her colleague. If she was in so much " shock" she could have sought counselling. Afterall, that is what her solution to whistleblowers who report the death of patients. What she did was opt to teach Dr Scot Jnr a lesson for having the temerity to criticise her. And that was the bottom line.
Will the GMC protect her? Probably - they hunt on here for my representations of the issue constantly. That is of course absolutely fine because I break most norms that exist within GMC Towers. I suspect I am rather different, I am a hybrid between being Indian and English. I don't value politeness in the absence of actual action. I don't value facades and I don't think any doctor should be "nice" to Professors until they start developing some insight into the repercussions of their actions. If Dr Scot Jnr had said the above in India, no one would judge him. They do judge him in the UK, with a fine yardstick of how the establishment expect doctors to behave. The public expect doctors to stand up for them and against the violation of human rights.
There are some people in life who don't deserve to be treated with respect. They have to earn that respect not demand it. Paice/Black have yet to earn the respect of junior doctors.
It is a great shame that so many people give up so easily. Then that is because the medical profession sleeps. That is why Paice gets away with all abuses of power because everyone fears to tread but prefers to take the line of political correctness.
3 comments:
People who are shocked by words alone, as opposed to descriptions of real events, lack experience of life. They belong to the "I didn't like the way he looked at me" rather than the "I didn't want my friend to die in custody" school of thinking.
Reasons for such hypersensitivity might include an overprotected life, an over inflated salary, too many layers between the person and what matters, too much power and too little responsibility.
Words alone are not shocking, only the meaning they convey. Perhaps Dr Scott's words hit home because in that tiny vestigial structure that was once her soul, she recognised a truth.
In the meantime, I believe we should all raise our game and aspire to surpass the literary bar raised by Dr Scott Junior - Dr Rant, it's over to you
Thought Dr Scott was describing Carol Black, not Paice.
The document from the GMC does not make that clear at all. Have altered the above post.
There were two options
1. That the post referred to both Black and Paice.
2. That the post referred to Black
The entire post is yet to land with me. Cannot confirm it either way at present therefore kept an open mind.
RP
Post a Comment