Professor Katona is the grandee of UK's psychiatry profession. Katona is the author of the excellent textbook Psychiatry at a Glance. It is about the best work he has ever done. Psychiatry at a Glance was constructed and vetted by our year at UCL Medical School. It is to be recommended for all doctors. In person, Katona is a quietly spoken, a distinctly crumply man who is immensely intelligent. The fact he has no dress sense is irrelevant because he is Professor Katona. I spent a number of weeks on a firm with Cornelius Katona. At the end of it, I left with rave reviews. I was asked to do Psychiatry.
As I pointed out to him recently - as medical students we often believe that our superiors are kind, genuine and even human to a certain extent. I did not expect the Picture of Dorian Gray I witnessed years later. The profession has two faces. The public face and the private face. The public face is cosmetically uplifted because the real face cannot stand the test of public scrutiny.
Katona works in psychiatry and is supposedly part of the caring profession. You would think he would care about his junior doctors. Katona became the silent man as soon as he found out about Pal v GMC 2004. So from being fairly amenable at medical school, he decided not to respond to my email. This was his solution to the predicament I found myself in. This is not an unusual response from those who perceive that their involvement with a taboo subject will not be advantageous for them.
Katona used to be Dean of the Royal College of Psychiatry. This was during the time, they allowed Sheila Mann to "discreetly enquire" into the style of my writings. I believe now as I have always done that this behaviour by Dr Mann was unacceptable. It remains unforgivable in light of the 2001 findings into Ward 87 which upheld all my concerns. The Royal College of Psychiatry to date fails to recommend appropriate policies to the GMC to prevent such violations from happening in the future. The impression from the Royal College is that I am supposed to accept this kind of abuse of power that infiltrated and violated my privacy and effectively contructively dismissed me from the NHS. I don't accept it and I never will. My view is that litigation never achieves accountability but the future remembers the past by the footprints on the internet.
Of late, Katona can be seen escalating the care homes litigation with his association with Yvonne Hossack. To him, supporting that is probably more financially beneficial than observing the "totalitarian behaviour" of the GMC.
I had an amusing conversation with Katona recently. At the time, his memory could not recall who I really was. He asked me what sparked my interest in the Care Homes Litigation. I told him that the media sparked my interest. I questioned a number of experts have been advertising the Castle study as showing that a "move" can be a direct cause of death. Katona can be found being "misquoted" [ or so he tells me] in the Birmingham Mail.
Katona failed to respond to the question about the direct causation of death. He tip toed around the question to his default response. He also failed to tell me how he was misquoted. Anyhow, we have to assume that David Jolley and Professor Katona know what they are doing by twisting the art of science to fit the clinical cases in front of them. Afterall, isn't that what experts do? Katona is a master of fitting words together to achieve his intentions. That is because he is intelligent and unaccountable. He is Professor Katona afterall.
I explained that I was disturbed that despite a shortage of psychiatrists, the Royal College of Psychiatrists were happy to approve those with a criminal record into their fold. The Royal College are interesting because they were on the web looking up Dr Rita Pal repeatedly and obsessively [ according to our logs]. Perhaps if they paid a little more attention to GMC number [5206241] and his criminal records in various courts, they would have caught the right doctor. The warning on his record states as follows [ which I found amusing]
Anyhow, Professor Dinesh Bhugra's paw prints are over the support of this man.
Even now, the Royal College fail to be concerned about the level of deception by the above doctor with a criminal record.
If I brought the above to the attention of Prof Katona, he would simply ignore me. Indeed, he did this when I alluded to the above. I suppose, he will say I am unjustifiably criticizing their fellow wonderboy whom they have supported since 2003. It is of course a little embarrassing for the Royal College to have approved this man for 1 year towards MRCPsych 1 in a job that the doctor had never worked in :).
I suspect his colleagues would rather support and uplift the career of a man with a dubious record rather than assist those who have done nothing but are perhaps a little too brash for their polite world view. I refer of course to Dr Helen Bright, Dr India and of course myself. Dr Helen Bright, a capable psychiatrist was essentially mobbed by her colleagues in psychiatry. Reports were written without examination of her. I have no idea how assessments are done on doctors who aren't mentally ill. Nevertheless, it happened. Dr India continues to fight against assessments by GMC assessors who say his emails criticizing the GMC's processes is evidence of a personality disorder. The Royal College who work in common purpose with the GMC in these human rights violations continue to turn a blind eye to these Stalinist actions. Professor Katona certainly turns a blind eye. No attention is paid to the high death rate of doctors at the GMC's health panels. Doctors kill themselves, no one cares. Essentially, those are the reports in the media. Shall we mention Debra Shepherd? She is a consultant psychiatrist who was driven to suicide. I wonder how much support the Royal College offered her?
While the Royal College laments about the shortage of Psychiatrists, there are 3 psychiatrists constructively dismissed from the NHS. This is the Royal College's response to why there is a shortage of psychiatrists. They appear to intellectualize these issues but in reality the College fails to support their juniors. I suppose they are more likely to support you if you conform to the dry manner in which they conduct themselves in. All juniors just has to read the British Journal of Psychiatry. They brought back the stalinist diagnosis of Querulous Paranoia.
Anyhow, we shall leave all the "experts" in care home litigation to cause more havoc with the councils in the UK so they can show us how much integrity they have. I cannot for one minute believe that professors who care nothing of their junior doctors would care about the elderly or the vulnerable. Expert fees on legal aid are fairly good these days. Money is a good motivator.
The above shows my view of Professor Katona whom I held in high esteem in the mid 1990s. He was the reason I opted to work in psychiatry. I now find him to be a man who is supportive of the establishment, who fails to respond to emails because of his inability to face controversiality.
I shouldn't challenge the status quo and remind the old men of psychiatry that they have now moved far from the land of integrity, honour and the truth. Prof Katona did not respond to my assistance for help in 2004-2005, he will not respond now. The reason for this is because he wishes to remain in his own safe haven, in a world that he understands. This is the autoresponse to show that in 2004 Prof Katona did indeed receive the email but never responded. So it appears that he wasn't concerned that a High Court judge referred to the conduct of a Royal College member to be that of a totalitarian regime.
It is safer for him to be with Yvonne Hossack who "buys" expert opinions . It is not safe for him to look into the violations of human rights committed by his colleagues at the General Medical Council. So I have one thing to say to Cornelius - yes, I beat the GMC in 2004 at the hearing without him or any of his colleagues who shut the door in my face repeatedly. This is the "caring profession". Their greatest regret is that I won the first hearing against the GMC and still remain one of the only junior doctors to do it. The judge referred to the GMC as a Totalitarian Regime, the Royal College of Psychiatry took no action. They took no action because none of them are man enough to stand by the basic principles of justice. Had the Royal College intervened, there would never have been any requirement for litigation. Then some of us have to create justice - where there is none.
This shows you that all is never what it appears to be at medical school.Perhaps Katona will be remembered for his expert witness reports for Yvonne Hossack, perhaps he will be remembered for his lack of responses to whistleblowers, perhaps he will simply be remembered for the fact that despite being a Professor of Psychiatry and being an expert in human behaviour, he failed to do anything remotely human.
He should though be remembered for his excellent work for Psychiatry At Glance because after that, it all appears to have gone downhill.
Those wishing to go into Psychiatry should consider the true aspects of the Royal College before opting to choose a career in psychiatry. The top of the profession are arrogant and controlling and the rest of the profession are supine.
Dedicated to Professor Katona
As I pointed out to him recently - as medical students we often believe that our superiors are kind, genuine and even human to a certain extent. I did not expect the Picture of Dorian Gray I witnessed years later. The profession has two faces. The public face and the private face. The public face is cosmetically uplifted because the real face cannot stand the test of public scrutiny.
Katona works in psychiatry and is supposedly part of the caring profession. You would think he would care about his junior doctors. Katona became the silent man as soon as he found out about Pal v GMC 2004. So from being fairly amenable at medical school, he decided not to respond to my email. This was his solution to the predicament I found myself in. This is not an unusual response from those who perceive that their involvement with a taboo subject will not be advantageous for them.
Katona used to be Dean of the Royal College of Psychiatry. This was during the time, they allowed Sheila Mann to "discreetly enquire" into the style of my writings. I believe now as I have always done that this behaviour by Dr Mann was unacceptable. It remains unforgivable in light of the 2001 findings into Ward 87 which upheld all my concerns. The Royal College of Psychiatry to date fails to recommend appropriate policies to the GMC to prevent such violations from happening in the future. The impression from the Royal College is that I am supposed to accept this kind of abuse of power that infiltrated and violated my privacy and effectively contructively dismissed me from the NHS. I don't accept it and I never will. My view is that litigation never achieves accountability but the future remembers the past by the footprints on the internet.
Of late, Katona can be seen escalating the care homes litigation with his association with Yvonne Hossack. To him, supporting that is probably more financially beneficial than observing the "totalitarian behaviour" of the GMC.
I had an amusing conversation with Katona recently. At the time, his memory could not recall who I really was. He asked me what sparked my interest in the Care Homes Litigation. I told him that the media sparked my interest. I questioned a number of experts have been advertising the Castle study as showing that a "move" can be a direct cause of death. Katona can be found being "misquoted" [ or so he tells me] in the Birmingham Mail.
Katona failed to respond to the question about the direct causation of death. He tip toed around the question to his default response. He also failed to tell me how he was misquoted. Anyhow, we have to assume that David Jolley and Professor Katona know what they are doing by twisting the art of science to fit the clinical cases in front of them. Afterall, isn't that what experts do? Katona is a master of fitting words together to achieve his intentions. That is because he is intelligent and unaccountable. He is Professor Katona afterall.
I explained that I was disturbed that despite a shortage of psychiatrists, the Royal College of Psychiatrists were happy to approve those with a criminal record into their fold. The Royal College are interesting because they were on the web looking up Dr Rita Pal repeatedly and obsessively [ according to our logs]. Perhaps if they paid a little more attention to GMC number [5206241] and his criminal records in various courts, they would have caught the right doctor. The warning on his record states as follows [ which I found amusing]
"2. You must refrain from criminal activity which risks bringing the profession into disrepute".
Anyhow, Professor Dinesh Bhugra's paw prints are over the support of this man.
Even now, the Royal College fail to be concerned about the level of deception by the above doctor with a criminal record.
If I brought the above to the attention of Prof Katona, he would simply ignore me. Indeed, he did this when I alluded to the above. I suppose, he will say I am unjustifiably criticizing their fellow wonderboy whom they have supported since 2003. It is of course a little embarrassing for the Royal College to have approved this man for 1 year towards MRCPsych 1 in a job that the doctor had never worked in :).
I suspect his colleagues would rather support and uplift the career of a man with a dubious record rather than assist those who have done nothing but are perhaps a little too brash for their polite world view. I refer of course to Dr Helen Bright, Dr India and of course myself. Dr Helen Bright, a capable psychiatrist was essentially mobbed by her colleagues in psychiatry. Reports were written without examination of her. I have no idea how assessments are done on doctors who aren't mentally ill. Nevertheless, it happened. Dr India continues to fight against assessments by GMC assessors who say his emails criticizing the GMC's processes is evidence of a personality disorder. The Royal College who work in common purpose with the GMC in these human rights violations continue to turn a blind eye to these Stalinist actions. Professor Katona certainly turns a blind eye. No attention is paid to the high death rate of doctors at the GMC's health panels. Doctors kill themselves, no one cares. Essentially, those are the reports in the media. Shall we mention Debra Shepherd? She is a consultant psychiatrist who was driven to suicide. I wonder how much support the Royal College offered her?
While the Royal College laments about the shortage of Psychiatrists, there are 3 psychiatrists constructively dismissed from the NHS. This is the Royal College's response to why there is a shortage of psychiatrists. They appear to intellectualize these issues but in reality the College fails to support their juniors. I suppose they are more likely to support you if you conform to the dry manner in which they conduct themselves in. All juniors just has to read the British Journal of Psychiatry. They brought back the stalinist diagnosis of Querulous Paranoia.
Anyhow, we shall leave all the "experts" in care home litigation to cause more havoc with the councils in the UK so they can show us how much integrity they have. I cannot for one minute believe that professors who care nothing of their junior doctors would care about the elderly or the vulnerable. Expert fees on legal aid are fairly good these days. Money is a good motivator.
The above shows my view of Professor Katona whom I held in high esteem in the mid 1990s. He was the reason I opted to work in psychiatry. I now find him to be a man who is supportive of the establishment, who fails to respond to emails because of his inability to face controversiality.
I shouldn't challenge the status quo and remind the old men of psychiatry that they have now moved far from the land of integrity, honour and the truth. Prof Katona did not respond to my assistance for help in 2004-2005, he will not respond now. The reason for this is because he wishes to remain in his own safe haven, in a world that he understands. This is the autoresponse to show that in 2004 Prof Katona did indeed receive the email but never responded. So it appears that he wasn't concerned that a High Court judge referred to the conduct of a Royal College member to be that of a totalitarian regime.
----- Original Message -----
From: "C.Katona" <C.Katona@kent.ac.uk>
To: "Dr Rita Pal" <rita1.pal_poet-ess@tiscali.co.uk>
Sent: Thursday, August 05, 2004 2:24 PM
Subject: Automatic email response
It is safer for him to be with Yvonne Hossack who "buys" expert opinions . It is not safe for him to look into the violations of human rights committed by his colleagues at the General Medical Council. So I have one thing to say to Cornelius - yes, I beat the GMC in 2004 at the hearing without him or any of his colleagues who shut the door in my face repeatedly. This is the "caring profession". Their greatest regret is that I won the first hearing against the GMC and still remain one of the only junior doctors to do it. The judge referred to the GMC as a Totalitarian Regime, the Royal College of Psychiatry took no action. They took no action because none of them are man enough to stand by the basic principles of justice. Had the Royal College intervened, there would never have been any requirement for litigation. Then some of us have to create justice - where there is none.
This shows you that all is never what it appears to be at medical school.Perhaps Katona will be remembered for his expert witness reports for Yvonne Hossack, perhaps he will be remembered for his lack of responses to whistleblowers, perhaps he will simply be remembered for the fact that despite being a Professor of Psychiatry and being an expert in human behaviour, he failed to do anything remotely human.
He should though be remembered for his excellent work for Psychiatry At Glance because after that, it all appears to have gone downhill.
Those wishing to go into Psychiatry should consider the true aspects of the Royal College before opting to choose a career in psychiatry. The top of the profession are arrogant and controlling and the rest of the profession are supine.
Dedicated to Professor Katona
1 comments:
When Soames Michelson and I set up the Doctors Support Network, back in 1996 or thereabouts, we visited various dignitaries. Included in our list of the great and the good was Professor Katona
Professor Katona told us that doctors did not have mental health problems and that we were wasting our time. "I think you will find you are the only ones" were his very words!!
This was duly quoted in the Guardian and I got a letter from RCollPsych telling me how supportive they were of doctors with mental health problems.... especially with Prof Shooter
And the GMC is still allowed to tear doctors with mental health problems limb from limb and display their corpses publicly on the GMC register - where anything enigmatic is GMC speak for "we think this doctor is mad, steer clear"
Yes despite a suicide a week, the Royal College of Psychiatrists does not give a toss what the GMC does to doctors with mental health problems.
"There will be no peace on earth until the last psychiatrist is hung with bowels of the last GMC panellist"
And I am not the first person to say that...
Post a Comment