This is the typical manner of Sham Peer Review ie Medical Mobbing
"Facing superior power and numbers, the targeted physician soon understands that he is the prey and the hunt is on. The final attack is often unleashed quite suddenly and with great fury. The resultant shock and awe often causes a sudden loss of energy and a mental numbness that impairs the physician victim’s ability to defend himself effectively. This often further excites the predators as the deer stands motionless, caught in the headlights. Shock and awe is followed quickly by denial and disbelief.
This is frequently accompanied by a strong belief that the truth will save the victim and set him free. Meanwhile, the stigma attached to mere allegations of wrongdoing produces an intended isolation of the targeted physician. As a result, the physician victim often shuns contact with colleagues, further assisting the predators in cutting the prey out from the herd in preparation for the kill.
At this stage, alone and isolated, facing almost certain demise, extreme fear sets in. How will the physician provide for his spouse and children? How will he cope with the bills that are mounting up now that the attack has stopped cash flow?How will he survive? Constantly living in an adrenaline-soaked fight-or-flight state further depletes the victim’s energy and is often accompanied by significant depression, complete with severe sleep disturbance (too much or too little), weight loss, and a pervasive feeling of helplessness and hopelessness. The risk of “death by stress” or suicide is very real at this stage"
Griffiths was caught with his pants down, subjected to a four year investigation by the GMC and because the GMC itself was involved in the mobbing, they let Professor Griffiths go. Of course, the GMC made some comments that were designed to placate me but in the end there was no accountability for a man who cost the lives of those on Ward 87, who smeared mud onto my name, who damaged my employment prospects irreparably and a man who consistently lied to the General Medical Council on many aspects of Ward 87. A master of word play, Professor Rod Griffiths is a silent and deadly mobber. The GMC was asked to correct his Sham study following the disclosure of the 1999 and 2001 reports. A year ago, they stated that they would consider it but do not have the guts to respond.
It is a well known fact that the General Medical Council is used as a mobbing tool for many doctors that Trusts dislike. The GMC as a mobber is a dangerzone because this regulatory body has the resources and lawyers to assassinate you. The GMC was enlisted into colluding with North Staffordshire NHS Trust and were quite happy to act as Mobber by proxy. As the GMC have found though, this junior doctor hasn't gone away quietly.
In my case, the massive four year complaint against Professor Griffiths forced the GMC, the Department of Health and the Trust to hand over the 2001 Reports about me or at least tell me that reports existed that verified by concerns were correct. It was at that point, my fortunes turned around. Without that complaint, I never would have been cleared.
The GMC made the excuse that Griffiths had " suddenly retired" and prosecution would not be in the interests of the public. Of course, no one asked the public this question. By using these tactics, the authorities have shut the issue down. Of course, unfortunately for them, it isn't quite shut down. Their efforts to assassinate my reputation within the media is something they do with glee. Of course, I am fully aware that the media refuse to feature the issues of Ward 87. It isn't my loss because those who act malevolently often have a equally disastrous future ahead of them. The issue isn't about Dr Rita Pal, it is about a Ward that the UK neglected and innocent people died - but no one found out why. The problem with those who feed the media with rubbish and the media itself - is that it focusses on the manufactured persona of Rita Pal as opposed to the actual facts of the case. It is a very easy and clever way to distract journalists from the actual evidence base that affects UK healthcare.
The GMC remains broadly silent stuttering each time someone asks them about Ward 87. The Department of Health has gagged itself on these subjects because again they have nothing to say. The same goes for every single Member of Parliament approached on this. Each party has nothing left to say or any solutions. The Health Commission avoids the issue completely. You start talking to them about 1998 -2005 and they quote 2005-2008 as the years that have no concern.
Each finds it extremely difficult to understand why I am not in a corner squealing away like a victim. What am I supposed to do - cry about it? I suppose that is what every single whistleblower is supposed to do - be a victim then moan to the media about how the Trust is "Picking on them". Well, you either do that or you either get equal.
I got equal - because the world does not have a solution to medical mobbing - only the whistleblower in the thick of it is intelligent enough to develop a strategic maneuver to defend themselves. The bottom line - you either develop a solution or your sink. The fact is no one is going to develop a solution for you. They may offer you tea and sympathy but this isn't a solution. Of course, there are always side effects to developing an anti mobbing plan and executing it.
Because the rest of the world [ particularly journalists] do not have the depth to understand what you are doing - it is perceived as odd behavior or making trouble or a campaign of some kind. Few will consider it a defense to mass mobbing. And no one can persuade a straight line thinker about a defense to mobbing which requires lateral thought. I have never tried to persuade a straight lined thinker of my own development of a defense to mobbing.
I think this defense is very effective. It is tried and tested many many times over. It is simply that most victims will quite happily hope that some white knight will come and save them. Of course, there are no white knights in the world. Those who do not understand this methodology conceptually will always make judgments. That is what people who are shortsighted do. That I believe is probably the only minor side effect - but then after you have been through medical mobbing and survived well, people who lack depth mean nothing. Their opinions are also brushed off in a few seconds. One simply has to pity them for their lack of understanding about complex matters and move onto more interesting things.
Don't for one minute think that Members of Parliament have enough balls to even resolve the problems at all. Most may have been educated in Eton - but they have the problem solving ability of a small pot bellied pig. It involves snouting in the trough and making excuses for said snouting. I make that comment of leaders of all parties who have been next to useless in my case although they do make interesting supportive noises while doing nothing constructive.
13 comments:
Thanks Rita, this is an important article and I have forwarded it to friends etc
You are right about the defence - you must be sure of your own ground.
I would add, that the truth only works as a defence when you use it actively - it is no good expecting people to come to you to recognise. The truth must as be simple and straightforward as you can make by being clear and specific in what you say and write
There is another defence and that is prevention. Too often, people take money, from additional grants controlled by their enemies, merit points they have not earned, soft options. This softens them up and leads the person open to the very charges they would want to apply to their enemies.
If you are not addicted to money and you have brought your family up to live in a sensible and frugal manner, you do not need to fear poverty. Like Rita, I have sacrificed my income for a greater cause. Like Rita, I cannot be mobbed harder than has already happened.
"Mobbing" happens in all walks of life. There are many people in the voluntary sector, given grants to set up projects, seeing those projects start to work, finding their funding dries up and spending the rest of their lives chasing funds. In this situation they are afraid to offend their paymasters but unable to effect any real change because they are constantly short of money and have no secure financial base.
The solution is not to take grants. Make the project self supporting from the start, with sound financial management and a source of income. Failure to do so, means you will always be in hock to the grant givers or the "money lenders".
You can prevent mobbing by being dependent on the good opinion of those around you. Continue as if their opinion does not matter to you, then you are free. Independence is wanting nothing from your enemy, and as Rita shows gets rid of mobbing.
Thank you again Rita, for your wise words which I have forwarded to many people on my mailing list
Much on the Semmelweiss Society website about this topic - it is a very large resource which I am sure you are familiar.
A good post, Rita and one highly relevant to my current situation.
I must admit that I do spend some time crying from time to time - a sign of severe psychological/psychiatric damage caused by mobbing. Then I dry my eyes and continue working out strategies to reverse the attack. Also the lack of sleep, damage to my adrenal system etc
I have been mobbed by my 'family' for years but until I had access to the internet and found Tim Field's bullying website, I couldn't understand what was going on. Both parents and my uncle and aunt fit the profile for sociopathic personality disorders. But you are are right, most people are good at pointing out the problem but not the solution.
Fergus Hoey, my uncle has been treated in the Warnford for alchoholism and beating up his girlfriend, his sister, Marian Napier Elliot, has been an inpatient in there.
According to my uncle, my 'mother' engaged in horrific bullying of my 'aunt' as children which undoubtedly contributed to her ending in the bin. Now Aunty 'Nightmare' says she has 'got counselling' and is best friends with her tormenter. Now they have me to mob. How lovely!
'Fuhrer Larry', my 'father'(so-called because of his Nazi attitudes to disabled people, black people and me, not because of any leadership skills) has now admitted that that he has been wasting police time and has claimed in a threatening email in response to a statement written for police by my fiance that he has 'much evidence' that he has not been putting me down and treating me like an idiot since I was very small. I'd like to see it.
A masterpiece of denial after being sent the evidence against him running into hundreds of pages.
This was also a response to medical records decribing him like this:
'rather arrogant','hostile', 'aggressive', 'dominant', 'quick-tempered' and lacking in insight.
In 1983 I told Dr Khoosal that Fuhrer Larry had 'outbursts of anger on account of his condition' and he put it in the notes! I'd also told Khoosal that he was a 'bit of a git' and I had never liked him.
I also explained to Khoosal that a boy who used to bully me and beat me with a broom 'only did it because he was insecure because he was adopted'. Who was the psychiatrist with insight into human behaviour? Khoosal or me?
Khoosal also thought that Fuhrer Larry was mad and said the prognosis was pretty poor as far as I was concerned because of his 'spare the rod spoil the child' attitude and he had told him not to treat me like a child . What exactly was wrong with me?
I am described in the records as 'pretty', 'attractive' ,'V feminine', 'very attractive to heterosexual men,'rather feminine in appearance and behaviour'( 1982) 'feminine in all her gestures'(2008)
The last insult was part of a 'mental state exam' after I had reported khoosal to the police and a GP called Dr Ord Hume started harassing me and saying I was an 'unreliable witness' in spite of having only met me once. She then tried to send me to a male psychiatist to be 'assessed'. Ie discredited.
When she tried that one on me I went to the surgery and announced my intention to complain to the GMC and that produced a phone call apologising within half an hour.
But I changed GP anyway and was sent to be 'assessed' by Dr Schlick. Fourtunately, I spent a short period working as a medical receptionist and knew not to wear an 'inappropriate short skirt' and that they think you are deranged if you don't wear makeup.
So I told Herr Schlick all about how lucky I am to have friends who are lawyers and are 'so supportive' and also in the bikers! I wanted him to know I was not an easy target. I got my certificate of sanity .
in addition to the comments by the doctors about my femininity, I am also described as 'likeable', delightful, a 'privilege to work with', 'articulate' and 'above average intelligence'. Clearly this horrific problems needed years of therapy. I had no idea they saw me in this way and had always been told I was the opposite of all these things. No wonder I got depressed!
conts
>>>I got equal - because the world does not have a solution to medical mobbing - only the whistleblower in the thick of it is intelligent enough to develop a strategic maneuver to defend themselves.
I did not get equal but survived because Rita is my Pal.
Dear Rita,
I do agree that the issue was ward 87 – and other places where care was not as good as it could be. The complaints you raised did lead to action – some of it forced home by me because I insisted that North Staffs should take your complaints seriously. I know you don’t want to hear that because it spoils your narrative about what an awful person you think I am, but it is true.
I agree with a lot of what you say about the effectiveness of your tactics, they certainly wore me down, but I have survived as well.
Now a word of caution, you say most MPs were educated at Eton. Beware of the word most – it’s what got Edwina Currie into trouble. Too many is defendable, but most is simply not true. The real answer is 18, and that included Boris Johnson who was an MP earlier in the parliament. (http://www.freebase.com/view/base/ukparliament/views/mps_who_went_to_eton)
A third of all MPs were privately educated, (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/4514156.stm) I think that’s too many, but then I was a grammar school boy who got in on a scholarship, so I would think that wouldn’t I.
A few more facts - I was not hired by the GMC. I was the Regional Director of Public Health and not employed by the GMC in any capacity. Members of my team did investigate the aspects of the problems you raised that were within our powers, but they were not paid by the GMC either.
The time when those investigations took place was well after the events that you complained about so there is no way that you can sustain the notion that I ‘cost the lives’ of anyone on ward 87.
I did not smear mud on your name. The only thing I ever said to the GMC was that they should leave you alone.
I find it a bit rich that you should call me a senile old bat, given what you have said in the past about not making diagnoses on people you have not examined.. You have never met me, never carried out any diagnostic tests on me, there is no way that you can make a diagnosis that I am senile. I’ll own up to being old, if 64 is old, though I suspect that your phrase is an ageist insult and not really appropriate. I presume that bat is not intended as a technical term, just an insult – though rather unfair on bats, but I can confirm that I don’t have wings or find my way around using sonar – though that might be nice.
I did not suddenly retire. When I became a civil servant in 1996 I joined the Civil Service pension scheme and my retirement date was fixed for me at April 2005, and that is when the civil Service started paying my pension. All that was planned well before I had any news of your complaint about me to the GMC. The notion that I suddenly retired is just nonsense. 9 years notice is hardly sudden.
I think the notion that I am a master of word play is an exaggeration – I concede that title to you.
I’m glad to see that you blog about many other things; it would be a shame if you wasted your energy and talent on me. I won’t comment on your other post about me, apart from saying that I don’t use the demon email address. You can say what you like about me; I’m not going to sue you – what would be the point - or even blog about you.
You are the only person who has ever called me a liar – it’s not true, and it hurts and I do lose sleep over it. Not a lot of sleep, but I tend to wake up at 4 in the morning and write about it. If it makes you feel better that you have had an impact on me then by all means feel good about it.
I wish we’d met in better circumstances – in fact I wish we’d met, rather than swapping pages.
Do you moderate your comments? Are you going to publish this? I’d have sent an email but I couldn’t find an email address on the blog.
Finally let me say that I don’t intend to comment further on our saga – whatever else you feel you need to say, or where ever you say it. I will read your blog, because I like the way you write and waking up the in middle of the night now and then is a small price to pay for being able to read some good stuff.
Best wishes.
Rod Griffiths
Prof Griffiths.
You are a liar. You were consistently dishonest during the complaint at the General Medical Council. Indeed, you were charged with those dishonesties.
Your report was a sham. It always has been a sham. It was diametrically opposite to the internal reports to the Trust.
You suggested I was incompetent. You suggested I was potentially stressed which instigated a covert inquiry and you suggested that there was no evidence to verify my concerns.
As time and evidence has shown us, I was right and you were wrong. The internal memorandums from the GMC showed that you were asked by the GMC to conduct an investigation. At the time, you also held a position with the GMC [ as you well know].
You cost the lives of many patients. You cost the livelihoods of many junior doctors [ before and after me]. You paid no heed as Director of Public Health to the concerns on the ward or the patient deaths that occurred. You didn't even do the basics eg check the death rate of the ward. You should be ashamed of yourself.
I plan on placing all the GMC correspondence online someday after I have quoted from your lawyers in my forthcoming book on this aspect. I learned a long time ago that the only way to hold you and Professor Temple to account is to write about you both. This includes your statements about the availability of the drip sets.
As for the General Medical Council, they acted on your advice. Your negligence cost me substantial amounts of legal finances, defamatory comments by the GMC etc. You are shameful man who failed many people not just me.
May God forgive you [if he exists] for what you have done. I sleep very well at night. Clearly, you don't.
I won't wish you the best because you have the blood of many patients on your hands. I have watched video footage of you many times over - and you are a senile old bat and as I am no longer on the medical register, I can do what I want and say what I want. If you were not senile old bat then you would have known that drip sets are not carried by the cardiac arrest team. Of course, it was you who attempted to lie your way through the GMC complaint. Through time, I have learned what a pathetic insignificant person you are. Better people are found in the ASDA checkout - at least they earn a honest living unlike you. The tax payer indeed wasted their finances on me as a doctor - because I would have rather not have found out about you or learned of your conduct. I would have been far happier working at an ASDA checkout - because there is some honesty and integrity there unlike you and your pathetic pals at the General Medical Council. I pity all of you for the type of people you are forced to be.
Rita Pal
PS Of course, you can sue me in libel in any court in the land. You won't because you can't. I have told you that repeatedly. Given the evidence I have, you cannot say you are an honest man. I never moderate my comments unless they are offensive.
PPS There is always Rule 12 on your last complaint result at the GMC. All we have to do is get some experts dismissing your work and we can restart the complaint again. As I already have those experts dismissing your work, all I really have to do is hand it to the GMC - but not just yet.
PPPS I see your work on David Southall lost on the Henshall case :). CNEP eh. David and I both consider you to be an unethical researcher who is completely incompetent. I assisted DS on the Henshall final hearing at the GMC.
methinks he doth protest too much and someone has touched a nerve. That of course assumes he still counts as a member of the human race, with all parts intact
I look forward to the opportunity to put own views forward on this subject once the appropriate documents are available
Some of it is already online. He had the Department of Health solicitors lying for him at the General Medical Council. He then offered the view that because he had some honour from the Queen he had to be honest. Of course, the outright lies were evident from the GMC's own allegation/charge sheet.
http://www.nhsexposed.com/healthworkers/doctors/gmc/gmc-in-the-dock.shtml
His reckless flawed audit told the GMC that there was no evidence to justify my concerns. When he was pushed on why one patient didn't have equipment [ not mentioned by him in the audit], he had no defense. Griffiths is one of those unbelievable men who offer the view that just because he holds some high position, he is capable of good work. Of course, he is not capable of good work. As Director of Public Health he ignored all concerns on Ward 87. He then denied any responsibility for them. I could list the lies he told to the GMC but they go to pages and pages.
RP
PS The problem with these old men who believe in protecting their position - having failed the public spectacularly, they now wonder how they can sustain their reputations. Of course, we all now write about them and allow the public to make the judgment.
RP
It is the poverty and emptiness of their souls that they are trying to excuse.
These psychopaths waltz through the profession using whichever agency (GMC NCAS Ombudsman Trusts) to shoot any number of colleagues.
Revalidation will make this much worse; as David Carter said it will set one half of the profession on the other half. Just as Alan "chips on both shoulders" Milburn wanted.
Count Rubin needs to have his fangs extracted every time he appears in the press.
Post a Comment