No Dr Bond, I expect you to die. Of late, I have had news of a number of doctors being failed by the Medical Defence Union. The interesting case was Johnson v MDU "Johnson, an orthopaedic surgeon of some 20 years and of unblemished record, learned that his medical insurers, MDU, had declined to renew his insurance cover for 2002. He made a subject access request to see MDU's files pursuant to Section 7 of the Data Protection Act 1998 (DPA)". The tale continued with some useful directives on data protection. Johnson though failed on appeal. Whatever the court result, we should note how conceited the MDU were through the entire process. They are almost smug bordering on control freakery. They are of the view they can abuse members funds and do what they wish. Perhaps power has got to their heads. Of course, they forget that if every doctor withdrew from them, they would have no money left.
The MDU like to keep tight control of their members activities. One doctor's positive psychiatric reports were not presented to the hearing at the GMC by Christina Lambert. She took no responsibility for the outcome. As most people know, I don't rate Lambert at all. I would not be represented by her even if she was the last barrister on planet earth. I also think it is time those failed by her took some initiative and reported her to the Bar Council. She may be paid very well by the defence union but if I was a doctor in the NHS today, I would insist on a different barrister.
Christina Lambert though has been wallowing around making interesting decisions on doctors for quite a while. We have all waited and watched. Her biggest catastrophe was the manner in which she dealt with Dr Gopakumar. Gopakumar is not a guilty man. For avoidance of doubt, Dr Gopakumar was accused of improper behaviour towards patients who had dubious credibility. The police took no action therefore the matter could not have met the criminal standard of proof. The GMC though did take action and the hearing was a farce. Lambert was probably out of her depth but an innocent man is struck off the Register and no one has taken any responsibility for the case.
The MDU failed him. That is of course common knowledge. This week I found a number of issues interesting, firstly that the MDU via Hempsons had represented Dr Harold Shipman. Secondly, that the same solicitor [ Ann Ball of Hempsons] who I don't rate at all represented Harold Shipman and David Southall.
I have reviewed correspondence from a number of cases written by the MDU. In most cases, the MDU have not protected the doctor against media onslaughts. Doctors represented by the MDU have sufferred greatly under the media's knife. Most of them have to become sitting ducks because the MDU refuses to allow them to defend themselves in public. The MDU does exert gagging clauses on their doctors. They also place the membership sword of damocles and threaten to " withdraw" if the doctors behaviour is seen to be against the MDU's world view. These gagging clauses are actually fairly severe in many cases.
Harold Shipman was due to appeal on negative media publicity. Shipman may have been a serial killer but many other doctors simply find themselves victim of public misunderstanding. Media frenzy then fuels further complaints which may or many not be valid.
For some reason the MDU do not seem to defend their clients robustly against false information propagated through the media.
The doctors who are unhappy with MDU representation keeps building up gradually. There is a unhappy murmur throughout the profession that defence unions keep running out on doctors. Rumours of the MDU dropping doctors mid membership are rife.
Anyhow, as doctors often crumble under pressure and never read the documents in front of them, I wanted to list a few useful things on this website to assist. It is quite simple really, if you trot down to the MDU website, most of the information is there.
1. The Articles of the Association can be accessed here.
2. The Indemnity Policy can be accessed here.
3. The MDU is regulated by the Financial Services Authority. See here for confirmation.
4. This is the How to Complain Section of the FSA. If unsuccessful, it can be forwarded to the Ombudsman.
5. You can of course seek legal advice. This is often costly though but possible.
I hope that any doctors who have been deserted or failed by the MDU do decide to make a formal complaint to the FSA. Details of the MDU as a company is detailed below. I hope this is useful to all of you. Life isn't easy and no one should be a sitting duck. You have to fight to survive and fight to protect yourself. This is a very important lesson to learn.
The defence unions have become rather large and fat following funds from doctors. If the MPS and the MDU keep running out on doctors, it is time to find a competing defence union who will ensure proper and robust support. Perhaps someone should set up iwantgreatdefenceunions.org so that all doctors can write their views on each defence union.
That way we can all have a consumer based opinion and spend our money wisely.
Conflict of Interest - Resigned from the MDU after they informed me that my writing activities made me " high risk".
The MDU like to keep tight control of their members activities. One doctor's positive psychiatric reports were not presented to the hearing at the GMC by Christina Lambert. She took no responsibility for the outcome. As most people know, I don't rate Lambert at all. I would not be represented by her even if she was the last barrister on planet earth. I also think it is time those failed by her took some initiative and reported her to the Bar Council. She may be paid very well by the defence union but if I was a doctor in the NHS today, I would insist on a different barrister.
Christina Lambert though has been wallowing around making interesting decisions on doctors for quite a while. We have all waited and watched. Her biggest catastrophe was the manner in which she dealt with Dr Gopakumar. Gopakumar is not a guilty man. For avoidance of doubt, Dr Gopakumar was accused of improper behaviour towards patients who had dubious credibility. The police took no action therefore the matter could not have met the criminal standard of proof. The GMC though did take action and the hearing was a farce. Lambert was probably out of her depth but an innocent man is struck off the Register and no one has taken any responsibility for the case.
The MDU failed him. That is of course common knowledge. This week I found a number of issues interesting, firstly that the MDU via Hempsons had represented Dr Harold Shipman. Secondly, that the same solicitor [ Ann Ball of Hempsons] who I don't rate at all represented Harold Shipman and David Southall.
I have reviewed correspondence from a number of cases written by the MDU. In most cases, the MDU have not protected the doctor against media onslaughts. Doctors represented by the MDU have sufferred greatly under the media's knife. Most of them have to become sitting ducks because the MDU refuses to allow them to defend themselves in public. The MDU does exert gagging clauses on their doctors. They also place the membership sword of damocles and threaten to " withdraw" if the doctors behaviour is seen to be against the MDU's world view. These gagging clauses are actually fairly severe in many cases.
Harold Shipman was due to appeal on negative media publicity. Shipman may have been a serial killer but many other doctors simply find themselves victim of public misunderstanding. Media frenzy then fuels further complaints which may or many not be valid.
For some reason the MDU do not seem to defend their clients robustly against false information propagated through the media.
The doctors who are unhappy with MDU representation keeps building up gradually. There is a unhappy murmur throughout the profession that defence unions keep running out on doctors. Rumours of the MDU dropping doctors mid membership are rife.
Anyhow, as doctors often crumble under pressure and never read the documents in front of them, I wanted to list a few useful things on this website to assist. It is quite simple really, if you trot down to the MDU website, most of the information is there.
1. The Articles of the Association can be accessed here.
2. The Indemnity Policy can be accessed here.
3. The MDU is regulated by the Financial Services Authority. See here for confirmation.
4. This is the How to Complain Section of the FSA. If unsuccessful, it can be forwarded to the Ombudsman.
5. You can of course seek legal advice. This is often costly though but possible.
I hope that any doctors who have been deserted or failed by the MDU do decide to make a formal complaint to the FSA. Details of the MDU as a company is detailed below. I hope this is useful to all of you. Life isn't easy and no one should be a sitting duck. You have to fight to survive and fight to protect yourself. This is a very important lesson to learn.
The defence unions have become rather large and fat following funds from doctors. If the MPS and the MDU keep running out on doctors, it is time to find a competing defence union who will ensure proper and robust support. Perhaps someone should set up iwantgreatdefenceunions.org so that all doctors can write their views on each defence union.
That way we can all have a consumer based opinion and spend our money wisely.
MDUSL is an insurance intermediary, authorised and regulated by the Financial Services Authority (FSA) in respect of insurance mediation activities only. MDUSL is entered in the Financial Services Authority's Register, register number 312054. You can check MDUSL's registration on the FSA Register or by contacting the FSA on 0845 606 1234.
The FSA is an independent non-governmental body, given statutory powers by the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000. The main aims of the FSA are: * Maintain confidence in the UK financial system * Promote public understanding of the financial system * Secure the right degree of protection for consumers * Help reduce financial crime
Conflict of Interest - Resigned from the MDU after they informed me that my writing activities made me " high risk".
1 comments:
Once a doctor has conditions, a suspension or even undertakings in association with their registrations, in other words have fallen into the clutches of Lord Voldemort by some means or other, the defence unions no longer represent them.
Effectively, once a doctor has fallen foul of or even touched base with the GMC, their career has ended. Without indemnity, only NHS work is open to them.
Like the defence unions, NHS HR asks a doctor whether or not they have dealings, of any sort, with the GMC. If the answer is yes, maybe, don't know, possibly at sometime in the future, they will never have another job.
The term "doctor" no longer means "independent professional", it means an "applied pharmacologist employed by the government, in a work situation formerly known as the NHS." Like all monopolies in a totalitarian state, the price of a job is obedience and silence.
To remind readers, George Orwell's book 1984 was meant to be a warning not an instruction manual.
Post a Comment