Ward 87: Anonymous Medical Blogging

Tuesday, 16 June 2009

Anonymous Medical Blogging

An interesting case in the Register for all those who wish to remain anonymous is this one.

A large number of medical bloggers are anonymous. Those bloggers are Dr Crippen, Jobbing Doctor, Witchdoctor et al. All of whom provide a good service for the rebel blogsphere.

They are anonymous mostly because they do not want the General Medical Council to deeply breathe down their neck. It is an uncomfortable feeling and believe me - not a pleasant experience. The entire judgment can be read here.

"The Times has overturned a court order which sought to protect the anonymity of a police blogger known as NightJack.

The blog, which has now been deleted, detailed the life and views of a serving police detective. Earlier this year it won an Orwell prize for political writing"

The blogger is Richard Horton a 45-year old detective constable with Lancashire Constabulary. When contacted by Murdoch's organ he sought an injunction to protect his privacy. But Justice Eady ruled he had no right to anonymity"

Well, of course Richard Horton was going to be outed as the writer. Afterall he applied for the injunction! Well at least he got the Common Purpose prize for his blog.

4 comments:

Dr Helen Bright said...: Wow. I did not know it was Times that did it. Why? Diverse Leadership connected in unity?; 17 June 2009 at 22:51
Dr Liz Miller said...: Good reason for always being upfront!
I believe that hiding behind pseudonames gives power to the authorities, after all if you are being secretive you must be doing something wrong.

Say it how you find it!

Anonymous bloggers want to have their cake and eat it. Winge about the establishment whilst staying safely cocooned with their regular salary and nice state pension.

Whistleblowers on the other hand know that they must face the music and lose everything, or stay silent.

I am no friend to Murdoch's media monopoly. If it sorts the sheep from the goats, and makes people stand up for what they believe in, instead of sheltering behind false walls, then all well and good.

I am proud of what I write. Even if I lack "GMC insight"

At a recent interview I was described in the interviewers notes as "thoughtful rather than reflective" and wanting to "spread the gospil" of good health and healthy work

Note to Ed Why are pompous people illiterate?; 18 June 2009 at 00:20
Henry North London 2.0 said...: The Hand of Common Purpose strikes again, with a big slap on the face for Horton.; 18 June 2009 at 11:19
Dr Helen Bright said...: Did Mr Horton PC say anything anyone remembers reading? Can we hear it, again, please, as I do not know. Did he tell the truth and was punished because of that?; 19 June 2009 at 06:39

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

Tuesday, 16 June 2009

Anonymous Medical Blogging

4 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