Ward 87: Calling Witchdoctor. Dr No is awake :)

Sunday, 23 August 2009

Calling Witchdoctor. Dr No is awake :)

Julia

While Witchdoctor has been concentrating on Ms Crinkly chops [ Julia Middleton], I have pattered over to Bad Medicine to read another masterpiece on Locum Doctors and Trusts.

Witchdoctor shouldn't take Julia Middleton so seriously. Middleton always looks like such a horsey girl with all those teeth. Has someone given her husband some safety instructions? Really, someone should put a sock in it and just tell her to shut up. Ms Common Purpose has some serious problems. Firstly, she needs a makeover and secondly she needs to stop mixing around with these mind bending techniques and leadership courses. Its getting a bit silly now. That is probably because she is a bit silly. Mind you, she is rich and silly which is probably a plus.

Witchdoctor should concentrate on much better pleasantries such as Dr No. Dr No continues to ignore both of us despite the fact his fame is now circling around the blogsphere as are his listings. Dr No appears not to be a sociable character, nor does he interact much with the riff raff. We suspect he may have revalidationitis.

He does though describe Dr Shark.

We have all met Dr Shark. I believe he works in Worcestershire Mental Health Trust. I nearly choked when the word induction was bandied around. Induction?! I doubt I have ever had an induction as a locum, you just jump into the deep end and swim. Ah yes, and you correct everyone elses mistakes while you are there. The Trust's modus operandi is that the locum should be blamed for all their own mistakes. It is a known tactic. After you have cleaned up their dirty linen, you are then called a crap doctor because you are a "locum". This is done by the use of the phrase "only a locum". Sure, a locum that cleans up the mistakes made by the permanent doctors. Quite frankly, I was tired of doing it.

I am going to stop talking about Dr No now. Might move over to Northern Doctor who is much more pleasant and amenable :) although he is currently in swotty mode. Not quite sure what has happened to all the bloggers these days - so serious. I suspect it is revalidation. It appears to have shut all of them up into writing about technical things.

1 comments:

Dr Helen Bright said...: I have heard the phrase:"Only a locum" so many times in many years I did work as a locum consultant psychiatrists.
What was I supposed to say to that?
Locum doctors are treated very badly and patients suffer. Sometimes, one sees increased death rate when locums are dismissed and work is left in the hands of those who cannot or are unwilling to manage the work.
Locums are dismissed as if they were of no importance whatsoever.
General Medical Council protects doctors in permanent positions and fails to investigate those who are the leaders of mobbing of locum doctors. The Chief Executive of the General Medical Council refused to answer my question if GMC had procedure to deal with mobbing.
One initiator of mobbing now sits both at the General Medical Council and the Council for Social Care.
There is this failure to take locum doctors seriously and it reflects really, the person doing it and their own inadequacy.
I feel really sorry for the taxpayers who have to pay and do pay only to be betrayed by irresponsible administrators.; 24 August 2009 at 01:01

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

Sunday, 23 August 2009

Calling Witchdoctor. Dr No is awake :)

1 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