Dr Pal does Drink One Can of Carling Blacklabel Every Year
It is now 2010, nearly 10 years since the GMC commenced what we in the business call a "spectacular f***k up" in relation to Ward 87. In order to make the GMC see the light, it has taken a large complaint against Professor Griffiths, endless paperwork, two litigation cases, endless chocolate and mountains of tortuous legal arguments on my part. Things are complicated. The problem with me is that I have never given up, on anything. I cannot say I have had the support of my colleagues during this journey to achieve justice. I have effectively done it all on my own. My MP Andy Mitchell has not had the intellect to see this through. The same goes for the Liberal Democrat Party run by Pretty Boy Nick Clegg. David Cameron has always been supportive though in a quiet way. Legions of peers overlooked this issue and I could name lists of officialdom who simply walked away. So when the world walks away, you rely on yourself and this is indeed what I did. My war weapons of mass destruction were my brain, my books and the power of publicity through the internet. I can't even say that lawyers were useful. More of a hindrance actually.
Out of everything in life, I have valued my family, my friends and my reputation as a doctor. I decided a long time ago that the GMC were not worthy of me. Following on from that, I decided the GMC were never going to sanction my registration.
I also decided that for each time the GMC was mean, the internet would be filled with one mean post about them. This continued on a daily basis from about 2005. Some call it obsessional, others call it determination. I just call it a war. The war was all about the GMC's abuse of power and their ability to ruin my reputation, try and imply I was a discredited whistleblower and their malevolent ability to circulate false rumours about my so called mental health. I know now that this was driven by the Labour government. The exchanges between the GMC and the Department of Health show this.
The problem with the GMC is this, they expected me to cower away like all the other doctors and keep tight lipped. Well, I wasn't going to gibber. As my dad always used to say - you get up in the morning, you work hard and you fight without fear. After you fight, you even die fighting for the principles you believe in.
In my world though, if the GMC wanted to pick a fight with me, they were not going to have a easy time. Now, my gripe with the GMC was that in 2001, they conducted a faulty audit that conflicted with the internal Report - 2001 Creamer Report done on Ward 87. The journey for the GMC to accept that they got it tits up has been a long one.
This year this war appears to have gone into some kind of peaceful mediation. Rod Griffiths [ author of the GMC audit] and I have been in mediation. I told Rod that I wanted to have my record corrected once and for all. He has apparently written this to the GMC. When I commenced discussion with Rod Griffiths some months ago, everyone laughed at me and told me that I could never achieve anything by it. I am though a great believer in negotiation. So Rod Griffiths agreed to this after some particularly prickly emails from me. I really admire Rod for doing this for me.
Rod Griffiths and I have made peace. I told him that after we put this Ward 87 baby to bed, we can talk on other subjects. So on that side, I have probably achieved something interesting, turning my enemy into my friend. Sometimes these things happen.
The General Medical Council in the meantime received a pre-action from me. I like negotiating in pre-actions because it makes the lawyers at the GMC work hard for their money and it makes the GMC focus its mind rather than pissing in the wind [ which is their usual modus operandi]. In my pre-action, I asked them to correct my data and my files at the GMC.
The GMC came back with a huff and a puff. I am not sure what planet Toni Smerdon [GMC Beagle] lives on but its not this one. She wrote endless crap in the usual verbose manner - with one sentence that was relevant - the GMC had decided to issue a Cover Note to correct my data. The audience reading this should remember that I have asked Neil Marshall for this repeatedly over about 3 years. The old man in the Laura Ashley skirts kept side tracking the issue persistently and failed to give me a straight response. My theory on pre-actions is this - you ask for the world and you settle for what you want. That is the principle I have always worked by with the GMC. The GMC was surprised I didn't go for the jugular, strip them down, litigate against them, kick their asses through all the courts in the land and all the media. For me though, these victories are personal ones. The GMC merely had to accept that I was right and they had been wrong. The GMC though will never apologise, it will show you their acceptance of the truth in different ways. I am familiar with those ways which are subtle and interesting. Mostly through a large amount of smoke, the GMC will always add a caveat known as "get out clause".
So, I have now succeeded in removing damaging material written about me as in Pal v GMC 2004 and now I have successfully achieved a correction of my data in terms of my credibility. This is possibly enough justice for me for the time being. I am thankful to the General Medical Council for increasing my ability to fight - where I fear no one - not even them. Of course, all this wouldn't have been needed if the minions at the GMC applied their mind to reading the documentation in front of them. Most GMC minions can't read, had not understood what I had written to them about Ward 87, conducted a spectacular f*** up and then tried to cover it up by a 10 year denial. In the middle of all this, thousands of people died needlessly until I instigated a Ward 87 shut down in 2005. That is the Labour Government's Legacy to the public :). As the saying goes, the Labour government couldn't even organize a piss up in a brewery.
Please will everyone note the reference number below.
General Medical Council – Legal Department
By Email Only
7th April 2010
Our Reference – GMC/R/CR/AP/3
Your ref: No reference provided
Dear Sirs,
Re: Judicial Review LETTER OF CLAIM
I write further to the decision Neil Marshall of the General Medical Council dated 31.3.2010. He has effectively refused to remove the Griffiths “Review” into Ward 87 from my files.
Proposed Defendant
The General Medical Council
Proposed Claimant
Dr Rita Pal
Details of the matter being challenged
The decision by Neil Marshall 31.3.2010 who has failed to respond to my request. This effectively is a refusal to remove a discredited review into Ward 87 conducted by the General Medical Council.
The Issues
In the year 2000, the General Medical Council requested that Director of Public Health [West Midlands] Professor Rod Griffiths conduct a “study” of some kind into my concerns on Ward 87. The nature and of the study is not known as it has not been established as an “audit” nor has it been given proper or adequate standing. During this “study”, the GMC conducted a “discreet inquiry” into my mental health which went “nowhere”.
The General Medical Council had always been aware of the poor standards of care at Ward 87 North Staffordshire NHS Trust. Indeed, they purposely and maliciously concealed the actual reports into Ward 87 [ 1999 and 2001] from me until 2005. The reports upheld my concerns. These findings on the identical data conflicted with the Griffiths “Review/Study/Haphazard mess” conclusions. During my complaint against Professor Griffiths, the GMC itself conceded that elements of his “Review/Study/Haphazard mess” bore no resemblance to the evidence on Ward 87. An example is the patient notes of Evelyn Price which showed serious problems. It appears that the Creamer Report 2001 was an accurate representation of the conclusions raised [as accepted by the Trust] and the Griffiths Review is now discredited.
Given this factual evidence, I would like to request that the Griffiths Review is stored away in a GMC safe with a cover note citing that the 1999 and 2001 conflicted with its conclusions. This Review should not be stored within my personal files now or in the future. The 2001 Creamer Report, 1999 Ward 87 Review and the Health and Safety Executive letter clearing me of any issue in relation with the needle stick injury should be inserted into my files with a note that my concerns on Ward 87 were upheld [ wording to be agreed]. At no time should the GMC be tempted to make statements to my past or future employers that my concerns were not substantiated.
The current decision not to remove the Griffiths Review from my files is essentially misdirected, irrational, prejudicial and not in line with the concepts of natural justice. It is also a breach of the Data Protection Act [ I am open to issue a pre-action on this legislation].
The details of the Action that the Defendant is Expected to Take
1. Immediate removal of the Griffiths Review from my personal files
2. Immediate insertion of the 1999, 2001 Reports, Health and Safety Executive Clearance and Notes of the evidence on Ward 87 [ agreed between the GMC and myself]
3. A note on my personal files that my concerns regarding Ward 87 were upheld and a copy of the Executive Summary of the Creamer Report to be pinned onto my files as a final conclusion to the Whistle blowing episode in the year 1998- 2000.
4. A further consideration by Niall Dickson regarding the medical doctors who were involved in failing to raise concerns about Ward 87. He should consider whether an investigation should take place into the doctors there in 1998 onwards.
5. A document issued to me written by the GMC - that the 2001 Creamer Report, the substantive investigation performed by North Staffordshire NHS Trust following my GMC complaint in the year 2000, upheld my concerns and that no wider data study was ever performed.
Details of Interested Parties
None.
Details of Information Sought
Further information will be sought as the matter progresses.
Details of any documents considered relevant and necessary
To be detailed at a later date.
Address for Reply and Service of Court Documents
dr.ritapal@gmail.com [ please respond by email]
Proposed Reply date
21st April 2010
I hope to hear from you
Regards
Dr Rita Pal
Out of everything in life, I have valued my family, my friends and my reputation as a doctor. I decided a long time ago that the GMC were not worthy of me. Following on from that, I decided the GMC were never going to sanction my registration.
I also decided that for each time the GMC was mean, the internet would be filled with one mean post about them. This continued on a daily basis from about 2005. Some call it obsessional, others call it determination. I just call it a war. The war was all about the GMC's abuse of power and their ability to ruin my reputation, try and imply I was a discredited whistleblower and their malevolent ability to circulate false rumours about my so called mental health. I know now that this was driven by the Labour government. The exchanges between the GMC and the Department of Health show this.
The problem with the GMC is this, they expected me to cower away like all the other doctors and keep tight lipped. Well, I wasn't going to gibber. As my dad always used to say - you get up in the morning, you work hard and you fight without fear. After you fight, you even die fighting for the principles you believe in.
In my world though, if the GMC wanted to pick a fight with me, they were not going to have a easy time. Now, my gripe with the GMC was that in 2001, they conducted a faulty audit that conflicted with the internal Report - 2001 Creamer Report done on Ward 87. The journey for the GMC to accept that they got it tits up has been a long one.
This year this war appears to have gone into some kind of peaceful mediation. Rod Griffiths [ author of the GMC audit] and I have been in mediation. I told Rod that I wanted to have my record corrected once and for all. He has apparently written this to the GMC. When I commenced discussion with Rod Griffiths some months ago, everyone laughed at me and told me that I could never achieve anything by it. I am though a great believer in negotiation. So Rod Griffiths agreed to this after some particularly prickly emails from me. I really admire Rod for doing this for me.
"Further to your request, I have no objections to the removal of the above report. If the General Medical Council wish to keep something on file they could use the internal reports conducted by the Trust – done in 1999 and 2001 [Creamer Report], versions of which were included among papers supplied by you in our mutual correspondence with the GMC. I also confirm that some concerns raised by you, relating to Ward 87 were upheld by the Trust"
Rod Griffiths and I have made peace. I told him that after we put this Ward 87 baby to bed, we can talk on other subjects. So on that side, I have probably achieved something interesting, turning my enemy into my friend. Sometimes these things happen.
The General Medical Council in the meantime received a pre-action from me. I like negotiating in pre-actions because it makes the lawyers at the GMC work hard for their money and it makes the GMC focus its mind rather than pissing in the wind [ which is their usual modus operandi]. In my pre-action, I asked them to correct my data and my files at the GMC.
The GMC came back with a huff and a puff. I am not sure what planet Toni Smerdon [GMC Beagle] lives on but its not this one. She wrote endless crap in the usual verbose manner - with one sentence that was relevant - the GMC had decided to issue a Cover Note to correct my data. The audience reading this should remember that I have asked Neil Marshall for this repeatedly over about 3 years. The old man in the Laura Ashley skirts kept side tracking the issue persistently and failed to give me a straight response. My theory on pre-actions is this - you ask for the world and you settle for what you want. That is the principle I have always worked by with the GMC. The GMC was surprised I didn't go for the jugular, strip them down, litigate against them, kick their asses through all the courts in the land and all the media. For me though, these victories are personal ones. The GMC merely had to accept that I was right and they had been wrong. The GMC though will never apologise, it will show you their acceptance of the truth in different ways. I am familiar with those ways which are subtle and interesting. Mostly through a large amount of smoke, the GMC will always add a caveat known as "get out clause".
So, I have now succeeded in removing damaging material written about me as in Pal v GMC 2004 and now I have successfully achieved a correction of my data in terms of my credibility. This is possibly enough justice for me for the time being. I am thankful to the General Medical Council for increasing my ability to fight - where I fear no one - not even them. Of course, all this wouldn't have been needed if the minions at the GMC applied their mind to reading the documentation in front of them. Most GMC minions can't read, had not understood what I had written to them about Ward 87, conducted a spectacular f*** up and then tried to cover it up by a 10 year denial. In the middle of all this, thousands of people died needlessly until I instigated a Ward 87 shut down in 2005. That is the Labour Government's Legacy to the public :). As the saying goes, the Labour government couldn't even organize a piss up in a brewery.
Please will everyone note the reference number below.
General Medical Council – Legal Department
By Email Only
7th April 2010
Our Reference – GMC/R/CR/AP/3
Your ref: No reference provided
Dear Sirs,
Re: Judicial Review LETTER OF CLAIM
I write further to the decision Neil Marshall of the General Medical Council dated 31.3.2010. He has effectively refused to remove the Griffiths “Review” into Ward 87 from my files.
Proposed Defendant
The General Medical Council
Proposed Claimant
Dr Rita Pal
Details of the matter being challenged
The decision by Neil Marshall 31.3.2010 who has failed to respond to my request. This effectively is a refusal to remove a discredited review into Ward 87 conducted by the General Medical Council.
The Issues
In the year 2000, the General Medical Council requested that Director of Public Health [West Midlands] Professor Rod Griffiths conduct a “study” of some kind into my concerns on Ward 87. The nature and of the study is not known as it has not been established as an “audit” nor has it been given proper or adequate standing. During this “study”, the GMC conducted a “discreet inquiry” into my mental health which went “nowhere”.
The General Medical Council had always been aware of the poor standards of care at Ward 87 North Staffordshire NHS Trust. Indeed, they purposely and maliciously concealed the actual reports into Ward 87 [ 1999 and 2001] from me until 2005. The reports upheld my concerns. These findings on the identical data conflicted with the Griffiths “Review/Study/Haphazard mess” conclusions. During my complaint against Professor Griffiths, the GMC itself conceded that elements of his “Review/Study/Haphazard mess” bore no resemblance to the evidence on Ward 87. An example is the patient notes of Evelyn Price which showed serious problems. It appears that the Creamer Report 2001 was an accurate representation of the conclusions raised [as accepted by the Trust] and the Griffiths Review is now discredited.
Given this factual evidence, I would like to request that the Griffiths Review is stored away in a GMC safe with a cover note citing that the 1999 and 2001 conflicted with its conclusions. This Review should not be stored within my personal files now or in the future. The 2001 Creamer Report, 1999 Ward 87 Review and the Health and Safety Executive letter clearing me of any issue in relation with the needle stick injury should be inserted into my files with a note that my concerns on Ward 87 were upheld [ wording to be agreed]. At no time should the GMC be tempted to make statements to my past or future employers that my concerns were not substantiated.
The current decision not to remove the Griffiths Review from my files is essentially misdirected, irrational, prejudicial and not in line with the concepts of natural justice. It is also a breach of the Data Protection Act [ I am open to issue a pre-action on this legislation].
The details of the Action that the Defendant is Expected to Take
1. Immediate removal of the Griffiths Review from my personal files
2. Immediate insertion of the 1999, 2001 Reports, Health and Safety Executive Clearance and Notes of the evidence on Ward 87 [ agreed between the GMC and myself]
3. A note on my personal files that my concerns regarding Ward 87 were upheld and a copy of the Executive Summary of the Creamer Report to be pinned onto my files as a final conclusion to the Whistle blowing episode in the year 1998- 2000.
4. A further consideration by Niall Dickson regarding the medical doctors who were involved in failing to raise concerns about Ward 87. He should consider whether an investigation should take place into the doctors there in 1998 onwards.
5. A document issued to me written by the GMC - that the 2001 Creamer Report, the substantive investigation performed by North Staffordshire NHS Trust following my GMC complaint in the year 2000, upheld my concerns and that no wider data study was ever performed.
Details of Interested Parties
None.
Details of Information Sought
Further information will be sought as the matter progresses.
Details of any documents considered relevant and necessary
To be detailed at a later date.
Address for Reply and Service of Court Documents
dr.ritapal@gmail.com [ please respond by email]
Proposed Reply date
21st April 2010
I hope to hear from you
Regards
Dr Rita Pal
2 comments:
Lucky Rod gets to talk to you on other subjects!!!
LOL . He is actually fun. People can speak on different levels. Besides, I am fed up with fighting with him. Sometimes you can just agree to disagree on some subjects.
RP
Post a Comment