Remedy's Steps to Heaven

Well, the write up is excellent, their previous picture was fantastic but Remedy UK have now gone OTT and placed a "Steps To Heaven" picture :).

It did make me chuckle a bit.

In any case, my inside sources at GMC Towers tell me that the GMC legal team are feeling sick :). No doubt they will have to develop their lying and cheating ways further in order to defeat Remedy UK in the substantive hearing.

The boys are coming to eat the General Medical Council up. Just that the GMC don't know it yet. Once they have done that, no junior doctor will have any respect left for the General Medical Council. Hopefully, one day the GMC will be recognised for the tin pot, incompetent, biased and racist organisation it really is.

CHRE

CHRE. Run by Two Old Men in a Ford Cortina

Not many people know about the CHRE. That is probably because they are never seen and never heard. You can read about them on their website here. Their functions can be read here. Essentially, the CHRE oversees the General Medical Council. The way they do this is to write to them and ask " Is everything OK". The GMC writes back and says " No problem" and the CHRE issues their end of year report that says that the GMC is " excellent".

Since their inception following the Bristol Inquiry. CRHP is the legal name of the organisation, which was established in April 2003 by the National Health Service Reform & Health Care Professionals Act 2002. They changed their name because everyone started to call them "CRAP". It was sent up to "protect the public". Country Doctor writes the most accurate review of their functions.

I have been requesting that they look into the obtuse manner that the General Medical Council dealt with the Ward 87 complaints. The CHRE have been reluctant. They do like to persuade you that your "concerns" will be taken into account but in reality the CHRE pays no attention to the dysfunctional manner in which the GMC conducts themselves. The doctors responsible for the deaths on Ward 87 were never held accountable. The medical managers were never held accountable. The GMC dismissed all complaints at Registrar stage. Large amounts of resources have been spent by the GMC in hunting me down. Of course, it is of great sadness to them that they didn't manage to throw me in the vipers den for good.

Nevertheless, it has taken me about 3 months to obtain this admission from the CHRE. That they actually don't think it is worth while examining how the GMC dealt with Ward 87.

"However, I confirm that we will not be carrying out an investigation into the concerns you raised about Ward 87 and associated issues. We do not think that there would be value in carrying out such an investigation"

Of course, we understand why - because it would more or less embarrass the government that no one responsible for this ward was ever held accountable. Those reading this should remember that it isn't a sense of justice or a sense of obsession that I extract these pieces of information. It is simply to show the failings in the system. Despite overwhelming evidence on Ward 87, no authority is prepared to investigate the disastrous consequences of the maladministration by the General Medical Council. So the CHRE will sit and watch and write reports. In the end, that is all they are really good at doing. Protecting patients isn't something they actually do.

----- Original Message -----
From: Emma Kelly-Dempster
To: Rita Pal
Sent: Wednesday, July 29, 2009 1:00 PM
Subject: RE: Your email to CHRE


Dear Dr Pal

We will take account of all the issues that you have raised in your emails in our next performance review of the GMC. However, I confirm that we will not be carrying out an investigation into the concerns you raised about Ward 87 and associated issues. We do not think that there would be value in carrying out such an investigation.

Yours sincerely

Emma Kelly-Dempster

Victory is never easy.

You have got to be tough to win

Jobbing Doctor states that Remedy UK's victory is a small win. It is impossible to win these court judgments against the GMC. Witchdoctor tells it how it really is.

There is also coverage in the Telegraph. The vital issue is that the MMC fiasco destroyed lives and careers. It also placed patient care at substantial risk. If the GMC doesn't think that is important then they really have failed the medical profession.

The legal theory is difficult and rebel doctors often have to have a near perfect case to beat the establishment. I have won twice against the GMC and lost once. I probably lost because the judge was spectacularly tunnel visioned and didn't like me. I can't help that of course. It just goes to show that even with a high rate of success by Queens Counsel, things can go wrong in court. Those errors can never be corrected and one has to just live with the injustice. I have seen the GMC lie and cheat but then that's the GMC for you. They have never played a straight game as long as I have known them.

There are so many issues at play in court. To win - you have to be perfect. If you are careless , you lose. My lawyers know all about that.

Remedy UK's victory is no mean feat. It is a historical judgment against the General Medical Council and their failure to respect junior doctors and their rights. Permission for judicial review is rarely granted these days. When I won permission to judicial review the GMC, I was concerned because I knew the GMC would up its corrupt ways. I predicted correctly. Fighting a solitary battle opens you up to character assassinations and assumptions. Remedy UK though fights that kind of thing off extremely well. This is why as many doctors as possible should give Remedy UK their backing and support.

Doctors with single issue cases have rare chances of achieving justice. I believe my case shows that. This is why groups like Remedy UK are so vital to the land of medicine. This era needs to change with a different type of doctor - one that is not oppressive and one that believes in addressing injustice.

I am really pleased about Remedy UK's victory - I think the juniors of this country deserve to be counted. I hope the tide is changing and that there is recognition for the hard work done by Richard Marks and his team. I know Richard works above and beyond the call of duty for all he believes in. He has researched the case law, worked hard on the various arguments and instructed his legal representatives successfully. I think his hard work should be applauded. Victories like this are rare, a bit like gold dust. Once you have caught the gold dust, you have got to take it and run to the finishing line. Those who have never fought the General Medical Council will never know how hard it is to win against them. It requires dedication, hard work and determination.

As for the General Medical Council, they know which camps I live behind :). Khan v GMC only one example. There are many others.

Remedy Wins

It ain't over till its over

The General Menopausal Council is currently in a spin having lost to rebel doctor group Remedy UK. As we all know any decent lawyer can beat the General Medical Council. It isn't difficult because in the end the General Medical Council are totally hopeless. I am really pleased for Remedy UK and may they go on to bigger and better things in the future.

Here is their press release.

RemedyUK wins the first stage of its legal challenge against the GMC’s refusal to investigate the managerial deficiencies leading to the MTAS recruitement fiasco. Mr Justice Hickinbottom found in favour of Remedy in their Permission hearing. The case can now go on to a substantive hearing which is likely to take place before the end of the year. The case concerns the jurisdiction of the GMC over complaints against senior doctors who were responsible for MTAS. MTAS was the new process for the selection and recruitment of junior doctors and was an integral part of the "Modernising Medical Careers" initiative. It proved to be a disaster. Remedy argued that the doctors responsible should be referred to the Fitness to Practice committee of the GMC for deficient professional performance and/or serious professional misconduct, and over 1600 supporters joined them in this. The GMC declined to hold an enquiry. We’re heading into the biggest public health crisis in recent memory and it’s particularly important that the conduct of doctors in senior managerial positions is not impervious to scrutiny said Matt Jameson Evans Chair of RemedyUK Accountability lies at the heart of modern professional medical practice, and there should be no double standards for those sitting at senior levels. The judge acknowledged that MTAS has been a disaster which had brought the profession into disrepute.

He recognised the precedent of the case of Roylance, which established the jurisdiction of the GMC over doctors in management, and he recognised that there was a link with the present case. He therefore granted permission for the substantive hearing, on two grounds, and he also awarded a Protective Costs Order in Remedy's favour. He declined the GMCs request for a reciprocal cost-capping. This isn’t solely about the events of 2007 said Richard Marks, Head of Policy but also about the jurisdiction of the GMC and doctors in management roles. The Judge himself admits that this is a case of some public interest Notes to editors RemedyUK is a grassroots doctors’ pressure group.

Further details contact www.remedyuk.org

Remedy UK Take on the General Medical Council

Someone has got to do it

Well, there is a first time in history for everything. Junior doctors have rarely taken on the establishment. Remedy UK appear to push forward frontiers. They are due to meet the General Medical Council at the Royal Courts of Justice today. I have written a brief report here.

I must say that the legal representatives for Remedy UK have done an excellent job so far.

I am surprised by my fellow bloggers who remain tightlipped on this issue.

Shrinks in Trouble. GMC Pounces on My Ex Bosses

It is shame for some people. I have no sympathy for both Dr Monteiro and Dr Steve Choong of Worcesterwitz Mental Health Trust. This is what happens when a Trust is conceited, mean and downright obnoxious. These efforts to lie to the court will not be looked upon with favourable eyes by anyone.

Meanwhile At Worcesterwitz Mental Health Trust

Where the Management make the patients look sane :)

Dr Helen Bright on Whistleblowing

Dr Helen Bright who authors the excellent GMC Human Rights website stated as follows

"Nobody protects whistleblowers. Courts have no respect for law as they serve the government so if one is criticising event (s) within the state industry forget it.


It is worth remembering that many people have been promoted to their level of incompetence (Peter Principle) and one discovers it to one's cost.Professional regulators do not investigate, call witnesses but persecute critical professionals to the bitter end.There is no mercy for the whistleblowers and eventually one looses everything.It is completely irrelevant that whistleblower acts in public interest as good public is disregarded by the epowerful, except at the times of election"

Dr J Fielden and Ann Keen. Both Divorced from Reality.

The Times has an amusing piece on whistleblowing recently.

Dr J Fielden states the following "The General Medical Council needs to give the message that as long as you act reasonably, following guidelines set by your organisation, then you are not going to fall foul of the regulator"

And they are going to give that message are they? They are the driftnet to catch all whistleblowers. Every whistleblower I know has fallen foul of the General Medical Council on frivolous allegations. For Raj Mattu in Coventry, it was "Bullying", for me it was a "typographical error and "link", for Peter Wilmshurst it was " placing the profession into disrepute" and so on. Besides it is not your regulator you need to watch out for in the first instance. Resentment and disapproval comes first from colleagues who find themselves inconvenienced by a whistleblower .Even if they personally have done nothing wrong, the attention a whistleblower attracts to their department/practise etc is almost always unwelcome. Enhanced scrutiny inevitably leads to additional work. Reports need to be written, statistics compiled, rugs turned back and the dirt swept out from underneath. It is messy, difficult work and who likes extra work. Those same colleagues quickly become disgruntled and take their displeasure out on the whistleblower. Before long, they become the butt of every joke, the cause of every problem and the scapegoat for every difficulty - referrals to regulators are inevitable, even though the whistleblower may have done nothing but try and improve the services.

Ann Keen on the other hand should be referred to the NMC for misleading the public. She states

"If a member of staff does not feel comfortable about raising concerns with their employer, there are other routes that still afford the protection of PIDA. These include raising the matter with a legal adviser, their union or staff organisation, their MP or the independent regulator, the Care Quality Commission"

All the research on PIDA shows that it is ineffective. The government have been concealing that.