GMC - Don't Go There I woke up feeling very sad today. I hate any of my friends walking into GMC Towers. I met Dr India in 2003. Dr India was indeed the only doctor to speak to me during that time. I believe the Doctors Only website was instrumental in pitting everyone's mind against me, tarnishing me with some mental illness label which I never had and chucking me out of their little " playgroup". In time, I didn't care but it did mean a lot to me that Mr India had the know how and the guts to give me the benefit of the doubt. Indeed, following our meeting he wrote on the Doctors Only website. 2003, was the year I had to pretend to me your average barn door doctor while fighting the biggest enemy a junior doctor could ever have had - the GMC. I don't think Dr India was aware of the true extent of the battle.
The sad part is that despite a ruling in court about the totalitarian regime, the GMC continues just as it did in the past. It never learned from the court decision. As I recall, it was a very lonely fight across the fogs of the legal libraries and the courts. I didn't even tell Dr India what was ongoing at the time. Indeed, we have never really spoken about it. I never thought the day would come where Dr India would face the same issues as I did - ie his correspondence criticised. While I was one of the lucky ones who stomped on the internet screaming and shouting about unfairness, Dr India wasn't as lucky. In my world, the best form of defence is exposure. Perhaps that is the reason I survived the rough terrain and attacks by GMC Towers. I know full well that life could have and would have been far far worse for me had I just bowed down to them. My fight with the GMC was a dreadful secret I carried around with me while I worked, pretended to be "normal". I often felt like the Fugitive. While the GMC has never managed to push me into any hearing, they have investigated me more than Harold Shipman. They themselves admitted in court papers that the only investigations conducted was on my written material. The GMC on your back is a heavy heavy burden. Many cannot tolerate such a burden. The burden is mixed with disastrous personal and professional implications. You become the "marked one" that everyone avoids.
Today, Dr India faces the GMC - essentially his charge is that he wrote a number of intemperate emails criticising the GMC plus his Trust and this apparently resulted in a deterioration of his mental health. There is nothing wrong with his mental health at present. He is a perfectly normal person. So the GMC has a normal person at an interim order panel hearing and boy does Dr Kelly look a fool.
Dr Christopher Kelly, GMC's arch idiot who propagated the personality disorder diagnosis has apparently slunk away from the hearing. I would though like to thank the shrink who did the independent report for Dr India. It was an excellent report. Moreover, the Occupational Health Assessment done by our very own Doctor Bloggs was even better. They were both fair and reflective on the actual state of play regarding Dr India. Essentially, no one else but Dr Kelly could find evidence of a personality disorder which is fascinating. This shows Kelly to be throwing his weight around, picking diagnoses out of thin air, not having any concern for the " stigma" a doctor may suffer and sticking it on him.
We therefore conclude that Dr Kelly of the Opal Centre Doncaster is a large prawn. We should even question whether he is competent to do his job as GMC Assessor or general barndoor shrink up north. I love their equality policy. I wonder if Dr Christopher Kelly has actually read it.
Oh dear, look I can't see the " We will take your correspondence and tell the GMC that we think you have a personality disorder" anywhere.
It says
Mind you, they are all a bit weird up at Doncaster NHS Trust. They do recall how they allowed Dr Kamuyuka, a man with GMC warnings due to a criminal record, the Section 12 approval under the Mental Health Act. Kamyuka had 6 months post registration experience and additionally lied on his Section 12[2] application forms about his criminal record. When this was pointed out in large arrows, Doncaster NHS Trust turned a blind eye. When it was pointed out to the GMC, they did not instigate an Interim Order Panel although Kamyuka remains in their procedures and has done so for a number of years. He has no sanctions on his registration. He happily continues with his lies and his deceit while Doncaster NHS Trust protects him.
As Bescoby Chambers will no doubt testify, many British trained doctors have not been able to jump the Section 12[2] hurdles there. Then we always knew that Dr David Goodhead was a GMC Assessor as well. It is quite amusing that Doncaster Section 12[2] panel hired a Dr Andrers Skarsten, a man who was not on the specialist register but one who paraded his "substantive consultant title". Dr Skarsten was later fired from Northampton NHS Trust. Skarsten sued the Trust who weedily settled with him after claiming he had mental health issues :) :). So essentially, Dr Kelly does not come from good pedigree. He comes from a organisation of shrinks who flout normal protocols on a day to day basis.
The issue I found most interesting about the recent GMC IOP hearing related to Mr India was the fact that firstly they give the doctor very short notice to prepare their defence. Seriously, by the time you have got over the shock of the hearing, the fact that your defence union is asleep and the fact that your barrister is on holiday, there has to be some serious preparation done with some speed. Getting expert reports in 7 days is almost impossible unless you have the right contacts. Getting a barrister within 7 days is also almost impossible. So what exactly is Blake Dobson and his merry men doing. The notice time is so short that no average doctor could prepare a defence within those few days. It is interesting that on testing their ability to adjourn the hearing, the GMC cites that the opposition does not have a good argument. It does not though tell us why the oppositions arguments aren't good. I suppose, the lawyers at GMC Towers are of the view that they don't have to provide any reasons but legally they actually do - in the event of a challenge they would have to particularise their reasons. They can't just be childish and say " Ah but your arguments aren't good enough". This is though what they do they get away with it.
At present, they have a man who is not a risk to patients. They have someone who doesn't have a relapse in mental health but yet they have pushed him into the IOP. The problem with conducting themselves in this manner is that they create more doctors who are against the GMC. There doesn't seem to be any protocol on the use and abuse of the Interim Order Panels. This case apparently tells us that Article 6 is not engaged. All that is required is that the tribunal acts speedily and on the basis of credible evidence. R (on the application of Malik) v Waltham Forest Primary Care Trust (Secretary of State for Health, interested party) . What is "credible evidence" is debatable. In the GMC's case, clearly any old incompetent psychiatrist can pave the way by calling emails " inappropriate".
This is what the GMC's website tells us - it should be noted that the GMC can engage an IOP at any time during the "investigation".
So, if the content of emails can trigger an IOP, what else can? And how fair is this on doctors? The GMC seems to be using IOPs on a whim really. I doubt they have any proper robust directives. For instance, to date the GMC cannot tell the difference between
1. Emails from irritated doctors
2. Emails from annoyed doctors
3. Emails that are critical
4. Emails that show a person has a mental health deterioration.
There is no protocol to tell the difference. So for instance, if you get irritated by the incompetence of the GMC staff, that email is considered evidence for " mental health issues". I have often wondered why the GMC have got to this stage of utter craziness. I suppose over the years no one has taken the time to point out the violation of Article 10 of the Human Rights Act 1998 that may occur if they conduct themselves in this manner. Over the years, no one but James Caverney Sharp has told us about the machinations of the GMC.
The GMC have never listened to rhyme or reason. They aren't logical. I should know because I have fought them on these vexatious and frivolous issues. I pity every doctor who goes through their hallowed halls. Even if the doctor is guilty, everyone deserves a fair trial in a democratic land. Sadly, the GMC is unable to provide this. Even worse, they have no insight that there system does not work. It is an ivory tower. One that will finally ruin the medical profession because the profession was never there to challenge it or bring it down to its knees.
Because of this lack of challenge, we now see the loss of good doctors who will be lost within the darkened halls of GMC Towers. No one will remember them in years to come, and no one will speak of them, they will simply be a faint memory. I wonder how many other doctors have disappeared like this over the years? The GMC is like a swirling black hole - it gets you one day if you don't get it first.
The sad part is that despite a ruling in court about the totalitarian regime, the GMC continues just as it did in the past. It never learned from the court decision. As I recall, it was a very lonely fight across the fogs of the legal libraries and the courts. I didn't even tell Dr India what was ongoing at the time. Indeed, we have never really spoken about it. I never thought the day would come where Dr India would face the same issues as I did - ie his correspondence criticised. While I was one of the lucky ones who stomped on the internet screaming and shouting about unfairness, Dr India wasn't as lucky. In my world, the best form of defence is exposure. Perhaps that is the reason I survived the rough terrain and attacks by GMC Towers. I know full well that life could have and would have been far far worse for me had I just bowed down to them. My fight with the GMC was a dreadful secret I carried around with me while I worked, pretended to be "normal". I often felt like the Fugitive. While the GMC has never managed to push me into any hearing, they have investigated me more than Harold Shipman. They themselves admitted in court papers that the only investigations conducted was on my written material. The GMC on your back is a heavy heavy burden. Many cannot tolerate such a burden. The burden is mixed with disastrous personal and professional implications. You become the "marked one" that everyone avoids.
Today, Dr India faces the GMC - essentially his charge is that he wrote a number of intemperate emails criticising the GMC plus his Trust and this apparently resulted in a deterioration of his mental health. There is nothing wrong with his mental health at present. He is a perfectly normal person. So the GMC has a normal person at an interim order panel hearing and boy does Dr Kelly look a fool.
Dr Christopher Kelly, GMC's arch idiot who propagated the personality disorder diagnosis has apparently slunk away from the hearing. I would though like to thank the shrink who did the independent report for Dr India. It was an excellent report. Moreover, the Occupational Health Assessment done by our very own Doctor Bloggs was even better. They were both fair and reflective on the actual state of play regarding Dr India. Essentially, no one else but Dr Kelly could find evidence of a personality disorder which is fascinating. This shows Kelly to be throwing his weight around, picking diagnoses out of thin air, not having any concern for the " stigma" a doctor may suffer and sticking it on him.
We therefore conclude that Dr Kelly of the Opal Centre Doncaster is a large prawn. We should even question whether he is competent to do his job as GMC Assessor or general barndoor shrink up north. I love their equality policy. I wonder if Dr Christopher Kelly has actually read it.
Oh dear, look I can't see the " We will take your correspondence and tell the GMC that we think you have a personality disorder" anywhere.
It says
"RDaSH is committed to eliminating discrimination and is committed to the fair treatment of everyone, taking into account their gender, race, colour, ethnicity, ethnic or national origin, citizenship, religion, disability, mental health needs, age, domestic circumstances, social class, sexual orientation, beliefs or trade union membership. The Trust is firmly committed to tackling all discrimination based on these values and human characteristics"This part on the Human Rights Act is even funnier.
"There are 16 basic rights in the Human Rights Act, all taken from the European Convention on Human Rights. They do not only affect matters of life and death like freedom from torture and killing; they also affect people’s rights in everyday life: what they can say and do, their beliefs, their right to a fair trial and many other similar basic entitlements"Errrrr yes well. I gather Dr Kelly missed that section off as well.
Mind you, they are all a bit weird up at Doncaster NHS Trust. They do recall how they allowed Dr Kamuyuka, a man with GMC warnings due to a criminal record, the Section 12 approval under the Mental Health Act. Kamyuka had 6 months post registration experience and additionally lied on his Section 12[2] application forms about his criminal record. When this was pointed out in large arrows, Doncaster NHS Trust turned a blind eye. When it was pointed out to the GMC, they did not instigate an Interim Order Panel although Kamyuka remains in their procedures and has done so for a number of years. He has no sanctions on his registration. He happily continues with his lies and his deceit while Doncaster NHS Trust protects him.
As Bescoby Chambers will no doubt testify, many British trained doctors have not been able to jump the Section 12[2] hurdles there. Then we always knew that Dr David Goodhead was a GMC Assessor as well. It is quite amusing that Doncaster Section 12[2] panel hired a Dr Andrers Skarsten, a man who was not on the specialist register but one who paraded his "substantive consultant title". Dr Skarsten was later fired from Northampton NHS Trust. Skarsten sued the Trust who weedily settled with him after claiming he had mental health issues :) :). So essentially, Dr Kelly does not come from good pedigree. He comes from a organisation of shrinks who flout normal protocols on a day to day basis.
The issue I found most interesting about the recent GMC IOP hearing related to Mr India was the fact that firstly they give the doctor very short notice to prepare their defence. Seriously, by the time you have got over the shock of the hearing, the fact that your defence union is asleep and the fact that your barrister is on holiday, there has to be some serious preparation done with some speed. Getting expert reports in 7 days is almost impossible unless you have the right contacts. Getting a barrister within 7 days is also almost impossible. So what exactly is Blake Dobson and his merry men doing. The notice time is so short that no average doctor could prepare a defence within those few days. It is interesting that on testing their ability to adjourn the hearing, the GMC cites that the opposition does not have a good argument. It does not though tell us why the oppositions arguments aren't good. I suppose, the lawyers at GMC Towers are of the view that they don't have to provide any reasons but legally they actually do - in the event of a challenge they would have to particularise their reasons. They can't just be childish and say " Ah but your arguments aren't good enough". This is though what they do they get away with it.
At present, they have a man who is not a risk to patients. They have someone who doesn't have a relapse in mental health but yet they have pushed him into the IOP. The problem with conducting themselves in this manner is that they create more doctors who are against the GMC. There doesn't seem to be any protocol on the use and abuse of the Interim Order Panels. This case apparently tells us that Article 6 is not engaged. All that is required is that the tribunal acts speedily and on the basis of credible evidence. R (on the application of Malik) v Waltham Forest Primary Care Trust (Secretary of State for Health, interested party) . What is "credible evidence" is debatable. In the GMC's case, clearly any old incompetent psychiatrist can pave the way by calling emails " inappropriate".
This is what the GMC's website tells us - it should be noted that the GMC can engage an IOP at any time during the "investigation".
When considering whether to refer a case to the IOP, the Case Examiner, Investigation Committee or Fitness to Practise Panel, as appropriate, should take account of the following factors:
- The seriousness of risk to members of the public if the practitioner was to continue to hold unrestricted registration. In assessing this risk the IOP will consider the seriousness of the allegations, the weight of the evidence, including evidence about the likelihood of further offences occurring whilst the allegations are resolved.
- Whether public confidence in the medical profession is likely to be seriously damaged if the practitioner were to continue to hold unrestricted registration whilst the allegations are resolved.
- Whether it is in the doctor's interests to hold unrestricted registration. For example, the doctor may clearly lack insight and need to be protected from himself/herself.
So, if the content of emails can trigger an IOP, what else can? And how fair is this on doctors? The GMC seems to be using IOPs on a whim really. I doubt they have any proper robust directives. For instance, to date the GMC cannot tell the difference between
1. Emails from irritated doctors
2. Emails from annoyed doctors
3. Emails that are critical
4. Emails that show a person has a mental health deterioration.
There is no protocol to tell the difference. So for instance, if you get irritated by the incompetence of the GMC staff, that email is considered evidence for " mental health issues". I have often wondered why the GMC have got to this stage of utter craziness. I suppose over the years no one has taken the time to point out the violation of Article 10 of the Human Rights Act 1998 that may occur if they conduct themselves in this manner. Over the years, no one but James Caverney Sharp has told us about the machinations of the GMC.
The GMC have never listened to rhyme or reason. They aren't logical. I should know because I have fought them on these vexatious and frivolous issues. I pity every doctor who goes through their hallowed halls. Even if the doctor is guilty, everyone deserves a fair trial in a democratic land. Sadly, the GMC is unable to provide this. Even worse, they have no insight that there system does not work. It is an ivory tower. One that will finally ruin the medical profession because the profession was never there to challenge it or bring it down to its knees.
Because of this lack of challenge, we now see the loss of good doctors who will be lost within the darkened halls of GMC Towers. No one will remember them in years to come, and no one will speak of them, they will simply be a faint memory. I wonder how many other doctors have disappeared like this over the years? The GMC is like a swirling black hole - it gets you one day if you don't get it first.
4 comments:
They said I had lack of insight
Idiots
I have plenty of insight it is they who are deluded.....
Deluded crazy fools next to the inner ring road of London
Is it possible to stick an IOP on Dr Kelly? on the grounds he is depriving his village of its idiot, and he (she or it)should return home forthwith
Yes if you can inform the GMC of a serious conduct problem and him putting patients at risk
He put me at risk by dropping me in the shit
So I guess you could
Rita,
Given the outcome, you don't think that the GMC is beginning to see sense? then what will we do?
Post a Comment