Ward 87: Dr Scot Jnr. The Cosy Chats Between Deans

Wednesday, 4 March 2009

Dr Scot Jnr. The Cosy Chats Between Deans

Dr Scot Jnr's saga is alive and well at the Dark Towers. For all those who don't know the story, please do follow it here. The fascinating David Patterson from the Dark Towers emailed me recently and enclosed the following emails [see below]. It is interesting to note the emails below between Professor Hemlock and Plaice. The document from Lis Paice refers to Sir Cyril Chantler. Sir Cyril was on the GMC's Standards Committee in 2002. His famous work was A View from the General Medical Council. It is clear that he spends his time telling us all what is proper speech. Of course, what was proper speech in his heddy days [ a long time ago] isn't necessarily a la mode now.

It now explains the relationship between the Doctors Only website and the General Medical Council. It also explains why there is a direct line for complaints against doctors who post there. I speak of course of the complaint against the late Dr Shepherd. This is a nice neat family who engage in fitting up junior doctors for a living. As for the General Medical Council - I know what you did in the summer of 2001-2003. It has all come back to haunt you :).

This is not the first complaint Prof Paice has made. One wonders why she would question Dr Scot's mental state? Does this happen to everyone?

-----Original Message-----
From: Gillian Needham
Sent: 19 July 2008 10:18
To: PAICE, Elisabeth
Subject: Re: FW: DNUK
Thanks Lis. Quite shocking.
I will discreetly pursue.
Thank you.
Gx
>>> "PAICE, Elisabeth" 19/07/08 09:08 >>>
Dear Gillian
I thought I should bring the letter below to your attention. It is a posting on DNUK from a doctor whose DNUK profile identifies him as xxxxxxx, an StR year 3 in general surgery. He signs off as 'from Inverness' so I imagine he is one of yours. I read the DNUK fora from time to time and came across his posting in the 'air your views to the media' forum, which clearly states it is open to journalists.It is therefore intended as a public statement of his views. I wrote to Sir Cyril Chantler, who is the chair of the DNUK board, as soon as I saw it. It has now been modified with all the scatological languiage removed. I have been assured that further steps will be taken to stop this kind of behaviour. I thought you should be aware, as you may feel that this posting, which was up for at least 5 days before it was altered, is evidence of unprofessional behaviour in one of your trainees. He may of course be unwell. I would be grateful if you would not circulate this further than absolutely necessary, as the fewer people read it the better.
Kind regards
Lis

2 comments:

Unknown said...: That fucking bitch.

I hope Remedy rake her over the coals.; 6 March 2009 at 14:58
Unknown said...: ... although, of course, she may be unwell..; 6 March 2009 at 14:59

Post a Comment

About The Author

There is a lot of things most people can say about me but in reality I am NHS Whistleblower. In 1998, I followed the guidance set out in Good Medical Practice[GMC] and raised concerns about substandard care on Ward 87 North Staffordshire NHS Trust. I also raised concerns about the large number of Midlands Hospitals covered by West Midlands NHS Executive in 1999. Following the recordings of the HSMR scores, only Mid Staffordshire NHS Trust spiked their figures. This was due to the inordinately high death rates. These deaths could have been prevented had the government acted in 1999. There are many other hospitals with equally high death rates but 1000s have not raised the HSMR scores. The Mid Staffordshire Inquiry shows poor standards that are similar to many hospitals in the Midlands [particularly Distinct General Hospitals]. They were also the identical to the concerns raised by me in 1999, many years before.

In 2010 the CQC finally admitted that North Staffordshire had "significantly high mortality" in the years I raised concerns.

This blog follows my adventures as a whistleblower. It was written between 2008-2010. It seeks to present what the media have never done. I also aim to discuss a number of medical issues important in the NHS today. A short account of my experiences is presented here.

Essentially, I raised concerns in 1998, locally then to all the authorities, the GMC, Department of Health and Trust attempted to say there was no substance to my concerns. In 2005, I discovered that all authorities had concealed the 1998 and 2001 internal reports that verified my concerns. This is a brief step by step summary of the events related to Ward 87.

Between 2000-2002, the General Medical Council conducted a "discreet inquiry" into my Fitness to Practice. I was never told of this investigation until I discovered quite by accident following a subject access request under the Data Protection Act 1998. The GMC were subjected to litigation by me due to the illegal investigation and repeated leaks of prejudicial information to potential employers. They were beaten in court following the first litigation of its kind. The GMC settled the case in favour of me. During litigation, the GMC subjected me quite severe harassment by revolving door vexatious complaints - 2 in total. I was cleared of all of them. I was never subjected to any Fitness to Practise hearings. All complaints were thrown out at case examiner's stage despite the GMC's malevolent intentions.

The GMC subsequently erased me from the Register for non payment of subscription fees. It should be emphasized that I was never sanctioned or struck off has speculated by some bloggers. In total, I have been subjected to 4 years of complaints that had no relation to my clinical work. This has had catastrophic consequences to my work as a doctor and eventually caused the assassination of my references in 2007.

This led to the test case R v General Medical Council Ex Parte Pal with the intention of defining the definition of potential misconduct and preventing vexatious complaints against doctors. The complaints were made by Penny Mellor and her associate Fiona Wollard [ niece of Professor Sir Charles George].

While permission was granted by a judge with Employment Law experience, the final hearing was lost courtesy of Justice Sir Andrew Collins who made various statements. One was that the GMC was free to rule differently on two separate cases with exactly the same facts and the other was to widen the analysis of misconduct to include conduct outside the profession. Justice Sir Andrew Collins has sat on numerous cases related to the GMC. He has often failed to declare that his brother Dr Mark Collins was once prosecuted by the GMC for alliances in Clapham Common. Details of this can be read here.

The two diametrically opposite analysis of misconduct was also discovered following the GMC's submission to R v General Medical Council Ex Parte Remedy UK. Essentially, one analysis appears to be used for some foreign doctors and a different more lenient definition is used for establishment doctors such as Liam Donaldson. The GMC were essentially caught red handed touting two different analysis of misconduct in two cases. This discrepancy is currently being investigated by both the CHRE and the Equality and Human Rights Commission.

The defenses to all these cases have taken up 52 files. By comparison, the GMC refused to investigate the doctors on Ward 87 despite the fact that their conduct was directly related to clinical work. They continue to work in various positions in the UK. No one was held accountable despite 2 reports verifying my concerns. Moreover, the Health Commission refused to conduct a broader data study in relation to the Ward 87. The GMC and Ombudsman refused to inform the patients on the Ward of the 1998 and 2001 Reports. The Sentinel newspapers refused to feature a legitimate advert.

In 2009, after discussion with Dr Phil Hammond, he wrote an excellent piece in Private Eye. While the media have provided little or no support for these issues, I am indebted to my fellow bloggers - Dr Rant, The Jobbing Doctor, Dr John Crippen and Witchdoctor. This blog exists to protect other doctors who I hope will never tread the path of whistleblowing. It is a path paved with injustice. It also serves to show the public that they cannot legitimately expect doctors to raise concerns in such a dangerous terrain. This indeed places patient safety in great jeopardy.

This blog ended in February 2010 as it was unlikely that I would ever return to medicine. I have also decided to end this particular saga here. I hope this blog will educate, entertain and remind the public that whistleblowing is a dangerous escapade and no junior doctor has treaded the same path as I have for a reason. The terrain is unsafe and always has been. I would say that I have been relatively unsupported in my journey through whistleblowing but singlehandedly I have been able to undercover evidence and establish some very important issues regarding the dangers of whistleblowing. I have ceased to respond to the media but I am always very happy to discuss matters with the public.

Ward 87

Pages

Wednesday, 4 March 2009

Dr Scot Jnr. The Cosy Chats Between Deans

2 comments:

About The Author

R v General Medical Council Ex Parte Pal 2009

Index

Important Judgments

Dr Pal's Legal Review

Blog Archive

Followers

Rita Pal reads

Search This Blog