Preferring Criminals to Whistleblowers

 

I wrote about Dr Goodhead's favourite psychiatrist a few days ago. Read here for more gossip. During the hearing Pal v Doncaster NHS Trust [ an Employment Tribunal case], I watched the entire group of psychiatrists line up in support of Dr Kamyuka. Kamyuka has more criminal records than Imelda Markos has shoes. The interesting thing about Kamyuka is that he is a master at deception. I know this because I worked in the opposite ward at Kettering General Hospital. Because my English was better, I was asked to cover for him, rewrite his scripts, redo his bloods and essentially do whatever was required. This is called being a "mug" because your consultants ask you to be one.

In the end, after Northamptonshire NHS Trust found out I was a whistleblower, they all decided that they unanimously preferred Dr Kamyuka. Despite working for nearly 5 years in the National Health Service and obtaining multiple recommendations, I was refused Section 12[2] [ Approval under the Mental Health Act for Psychiatrists] by Dr Goodhead and team. For all those who don't know, Dr David Goodhead is an elderly psychiatrist who doesn't do much these days. His years of being a nasty person have taken a toll on him.

I wasn't the only one he refused Section 12[2] approval to. Dr India who had worked for longer was refused as well. Goodhead is infamous for his discriminatory ways. Indeed, Dr Bescoby Chambers knows all about this and once discussed it on Doctors.net.uk. The ripples of the Section 12[2] battle continues because when I told the world the Kamyuka was a master at deception, they all called it sour grapes

The entire panel unanimously gave Kamyuka Section 12[2] and following his warning at the GMC and subsequent investigation, they renewed the accolade. Of course, to Dr Goodhead, it is just another way at proving how trully dysfunctional he really is. Somehow repeating the Section 12[2] approval justifies how right the Trust was.

During the above challenge and Goodhead was becoming quite hot headed and at one point suggested that the GMC look at my mental health. Dr India and I were tired of his antics of course. We yawned at his letter to the GMC and truly wished he would just shut his trap like a good boy.

These days, I wonder who looks the real fool. Kamyuka was found guilty of forging a prescription recently, given 100 hours community service and a fine. Dr Goodhead, we believe continues to support him. I think one of these days, I ought to put up some of their meeting notes and statements - they contain glorious support for Dr Kamyuka whereas their stance is as specified below. Please note, while Kamyuka did not have to obtain postgraduate qualifications for Section 12[2] approval, apparently I and Dr India as British qualified doctors, had to. Kamyuka was spectacularly supported numbers members of the Royal College of Psychiatrists - one Dr Neil Holden was practically in love with the man. A notable issue about Kamyuka is that the panel took his "limited registration" experience as superior to "post registration experience". This was of course unheard of until this approval.

So while I watch Kamyuka's criminal record unfold, it should be noted that in this case, the medical profession prefers a criminal to a whistleblower. The case progresses to a GMC Hearing.

Dr Skarsten below was given warning for his efforts to decieve everyone on behalf of Dr Kamyuka. While he refers to a "litigious stance below", he resorted to a similar stance himself when he sued Northamptonshire Mental Health Trust. How ironic.

This case has been played out online to demonstrate the conceited nature of a string of well known Psychiatrists. Their love for a criminal is touching really. I observe this state of affairs which is essentially satellite medical mobbing. These doctors again feel it is their duty to the great medical establishment to make life as difficult as possible for the whistleblower. Personally, in my view, all the consultants were rather dysfunctional with personalities that had not evolved beyond the playground. This applies to Dr David Goodhead. A little boy in a big playground with no accountability. Of course, he is going to misbehave.

So why did I do medicine again? If someone had told me " Hey Reets, the entire spectrum of medicine is filled with Class A assholes", I wouldn't have become a doctor. 

Anyhow, its all fun in love and war - I can stand at the rooftop and say " I was right "  [yet again] and no one will probably give a damn. Then I am probably right 95 percent of the time :) [ and modest].

17th September 2004

Dr Goodhead
Chairman of East Midlands and Yorkshire
Section 12 Accreditation panel
Department of Psychiatry
Doncaster Royal Infirmary
Armthorpe Road
Doncaster
DN25LT

Dear Dr Goodhead

I am writing to clarify my position regarding Rita Pal who is a appealing against the decision to defer approval of her Section 12 status until she has achieved a specialist qualification in line with the revised guidelines for Section 12 approval.

Dr Pal was clinically competent enough for consideration for Section 12 approval. However, I am disconcerted that she has resorted to a litigious stance regarding the panel who after all are unpaid volunteers. Philosophically Dr Kamyuka is in the twilight of his career, whereas Dr Pal is at the start of her career and should consider qualifications as a stepping stone to advancement.

Yours sincerely

Dr Anders Skarsten
Consultant Psychiatrist

Fascinating Captain GMC

Today, a letter landed in my email box. The GMC is learning how to limit themselves to email rather than clogging my post box. Apparently, after smiting me down in the past, referring to me as a persons whose complaints "went nowhere", they have take up the most interesting one. It has taken 5 years from initial complaint, to the complaint being thrown out, to me winning a Rule 12 application, to Neil Marshall denying the doctor had a criminal record. When I asked that the GMC investigate the matter in the Magistrates Court, they accused me of a "fishing" expedition. I subsequently, discovered the criminal record and forwarded this to the GMC. There were numerous huffs everywhere. The GMC went silent for 8 months. Today, the GMC has taken it forward to a substantive hearing. Of course, had it not been for my persistence, there wouldn't have been a hearing. 

What is the most fascinating aspect of this specific issue is that I am currently amusing myself as I watch the Royal College of Psychiatrists hold their heads in shame. Dinesh Bhugra, President of the Royal College stamped his approval for this doctor. Numerous psychiatrists supported him through every job, every application and at every single step. Few people noticed that everything was based on false statements.  

Contrary to perceptions, it is not easy for me to succeed in anything at the GMC. I have to work hard at it and I have had to be better at GMC jurisprudence than the average bear. This has been a very hard task requiring hard work and determination. 

Peter Wilmshurst once stated that we sometimes have to work with the GMC because they are all we have to bring bad doctors to account. I am going to need I.V chocolate. Me work with the GMC? I suppose I could bite my lip for the greater good. Whatever the greater good is. 

Cheers Dinesh! Here is to your man being tried at the GMC :). 

R v GMC Ex Parte Remedy UK and R v GMC Ex Parte Pal. The Ultimate Dissection

Demanding Attention For This Boring Subject Related to the GMC. 

Richard Marks has always been a dish.  I think one of the most important aspects of my life is having the luck of associating with such dashing men. It is of course a hard life but someone has to lead it and it might as well be me. As most people will appreciate, I have my priorities in life - charming men being highest on my list of rebel accessories.

Marks has been busy. He has been fraternising with Peter Gooderham who I am not greatly fond of. Peter's days of claiming the success of pre-determinations appears to be over. Peter once did a rather overindulgent speech for the world but purposely missed out Pal v GMC 2004 during that speech. Anyhow, what can we say of a man whose best friend once suggested that I be referred to the GMC for the colours used on a blog [Oh yes, and we have the emails to prove this Peter]. It is therefore fascinating that he refers to my loss in court as referred to in this piece featured in BMJ Careers. This is what they state in their piece

"Secondly, the interpretation of the phrase “the doctor’s profession is incidental to the matter” has been made less easy to understand. It seems now that two doctors exercising huge influence over the delivery of health care are immune from GMC proceedings because their role is insufficiently close to patients. But this assertion (which is disputed by RemedyUK) cannot be reconciled with another GMC case, upheld by a High Court judge,[6] where it was ruled that a doctor who was no longer engaged in medical practice should nevertheless be investigated for possible misconduct after she had written something on a blog unrelated to medicine. This is completely inconsistent. Is there one rule for doctors working for the government, and a different rule for doctors who, in a manner wholly unrelated to clinical practice, express their opinions? Doctors and their regulators need new and explicit guidance on what sort of actions away from their clinical work can fall within the scope of fitness to practise"

I must though correct the above statement slightly here. Firstly, at the time I was indeed engaged in medical practice [ Psychiatry] and secondly the emphasis should have been on the fact that it was not what I had written on the blog but that I had linked to a public document. The "Link" was enough to engage a Stream 1 investigation meant for murders, liars and cheats. It should also be noted that in a case with exactly the same facts regarding Dr Aubrey Blumsohn, a white doctor who was the one who conspired to publish the document online, the GMC used the test in R v GMC Ex Parte Remedy UK and threw the case out. The other aspect of this case missed out by the authors was that the complaint was made by none other than the GMC's resident airhead latest child protection advisor  . We should be thankful to the airhead because she provides us with the best evidence we have to date of institutional racism in the GMC. The GMC's equality policy states as follows 

""Our Equality and Diversity Reference Group advises on the action required to fulfil our commitment to valuing diversity and promoting equality and helps ensure that equality and diversity is embedded in the development and review of policies and procedures across the GMC"

The GMC's own website refers to the following :-

"Respect the principles of good regulation: proportionality, accountability, consistency, transparency and targeting"

Consistency is a important word. In fact it is a vital word. What is said by the GMC is clearly not what is done in reality. The GMC continue to be shameless of course. What the article misses out of course is this, that the GMC perverted the course of justice and presented two analysis of the word "misconduct" in two cases. Of course, in their tiny minds, they assumed that Richard and I would not know what they had done. What does the ruling mean for the average doctor ?. Here is what it means

1. If the GMC dislike you, if you are a junior doctor and if you are from the ethnic minority, you can be assured that the test of misconduct used for you when faced with a GMC complaint will be the more draconian one referred to by Collins J in R v GMC Ex Parte Pal. This is where the GMC simply has to disapprove of your conduct to instigate their proceedings. 

2. Liam Donaldson et al can enjoy the fruits of not being "Investigated" by the GMC. This means there is no obligation for the Liam to disclose this event on any application form.The documents submitted by Remedy UK will not be sent to all his employers. 

3.  What does a Stream 1 investigation mean for us average folk, it means we have to declare it on all application forms. We have to declare it on all appraisals and revalidation. The GMC will hold the event on their fitness to practise database making it more likely for any further complaints to be pushed through. The GMC will disclose the defamatory if not obscene pages created by the complainant to all your employers. You cannot remove these allegations even after the investigation is over. There is a high potential of these allegations spreading to most employers. 

4. It should be noted that in R v GMC Ex Parte Pal, Collins J tried to make up for the fact he invented his own test of "misconduct" especially for me. He tried to say that the word "proceeding" as referred to in all application forms did not mean investigations that did not reach hearing. He failed to read the law on this as exhibited by R v Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal Ex Parte Toth where proceeding commences from the point of commencement of investigation.It is therefore vital that no doctor relies on this judgment when asked to declare whether they have been subjected to GMC "proceedings". The safe alternative is to simply declare an investigation no matter how prejudicial this is. A lack of declaration will instigate a further GMC investigation for dishonesty.

Remedy UK's journey appears to come to an end in court. Mine though will continue through various forums. I refuse to accept that I and my friends and colleagues should be subjected to a different test of misconduct to that used for Liam Donaldson. My journey has just begun and this is the best evidence of indirect discrimination we have ever had against the GMC as an institution. It raises the question whether the GMC have historically been using variable tests of misconduct depending on who they like or dislike and who influences their decision making processes. The analysis of "misconduct" is pivotal to medical regulation. It is used by Trusts and the GMC. It could mean the difference between preserving your livelihood or destroying it. At present, I have no remedy for the fact I was fired from the Trust I was working for, never reinstated despite being cleared 6 months later. My declaration on any application form  is as follows

"I was investigated for breach of confidentiality and referring to myself as a Psychiatrist despite being an affiliate member of the Royal College of Psychiatrists in 2007. I was cleared after 6 months of investigation. While I was being investigated, the GMC panellist, also the Medical Director at the Trust fired me on paper then manufactured a lie in court by saying I had resigned. As he and the Clinical Director failed to produce a resignation letter or indeed any evidence to substantiate their lie, the GMC used R v GMC Ex Parte Pal to investigate their misdemeanors. They were charged under Rule 7 of the Fitness to Practise Rules in 2010, three years after the event". 

Now, would any Trust now employ a person with that declaration? The repercussions of course would be that the Trust contacts the locum agencies, my previous employers and the GMC to obtain the entire file of allegations and court challenges. Would any HR manager consider this scenario created solely by the GMC to be a Trust liability or not?

Does this scenario engage a state of unemployability or not?

Remedy UK and I have had to swallow the bitter pill. Technically, their case should have followed the case law created in my case. The Courts though cleverly brought in a Lord Justice to create the test for misconduct for Liam Donaldson. The Lord Chief Justice's letter discovered by the Independent stated as follows

"All judges must, of course, be very mindful of how they express themselves when dealing with sensitive issues of equality and diversity so as not to create the impression that some individuals can expect more leniency than others". 

Really?  This is really not the scenario we see between myself, Aubrew Blumsohn and Remedy UK. I asked the GMC recently to just admit that they invented the Rita Pal special test just for me and every other person they dislike. They remain tight lipped. Amazing how quiet they can be when they have dug themselves into their own pit.

Out of all this, I believe the best things to come out are as follows. R v GMC Ex Parte Remedy UK is the case law that can be used by any doctor to protect themselves from the wrath of the GMC. This is something that does not come across in the BMJ piece. I hope to obtain further protection through various approaches I have made in my continuing journey to achieve some modium of justice.

With respect to Richard Marks. Apart from his good looks and charming self, I have always appreciated  the fact that he gave me one more chance to be his friend. There are perks to being Richard's friend. I get to platonically lush over his brain power and his sense of humour :). What a way to live eh!  Of course, of late I have been a bit put out by the fact he has resorted to the arms of numerous Greek Goddesses and their ample busts  :).  The worst thing about associating with a married man and admiring him from afar is the fact that I shall never ever get the opportunity to tie him up with my wonderbra. That suggestion may well get me whipped by his wife's Gucci handbag :). Fantasy is a fabulous thing in the kind of prison the GMC has thrown me in. Richard appreciates that women like me cannot just live on bread and water alone :).Perhaps  Dr Marks would like to come up and see my collection of GMC case law sometime :).

Cardinal Fang's Door Formally Known as the General Medical Council.

The above is the original door to the Spanish Inquisition based in Spain. Dr India sent this to me in line with my habit of parodying the GMC.Those who know the GMC will note the similarities to the Inquisition

"The inquisition was created through papal bull, Ad Abolendam, issued at the end of the 12th century by Pope Lucius III as a way to combat the Albigensian heresy in southern France. There were a huge number of tribunals of the Papal Inquisition in various European kingdoms during the Middle Ages. In the Kingdom of Aragon, a tribunal of the Papal Inquisition was established by the statute of Excommunicamus of Pope Gregory IX, in 1232, during the era of the Albigensian heresy. Its principal representative was Ramon de Penyafort. With time, its importance was diluted, and, by the middle of the 15th century, it was almost forgotten although still there according to the law"

The legend that is Monty Python has a better parody of the GMC :). Doctors who have faced allegations by the GMC will note a certain familiarity. The last attempt to extract a false confession was detailed by us here. Graham Archard, expert to the Spanish Inquisition demanded that this doctor be prosecuted for his beliefs about Vitamin D. Of course, when the research came out to support the doctor, everything went silent. Infact we can hear a pin drop. So I wonder what the expert [who frequently supports quack medicine] has to say for himself. The GMC will no doubt accept that they have been silly little dim boys for taking this issue up in the first place. I have never known a half crazed medical regulatory body who stoops low enough to trawl through the internet printing out posts and messages and then trying to fabricate a so called " expert" opinion. Perhaps its time for the expert to be investigated by the GMC :).

The GMC Disability

One of the biggest problems with the GMC is that they have never found their role in life. I once read an excellent book written by George Bernard Shaw. The reference is as follows - Shaw G B. Doctors' delusions, crude criminology and sham education. London: Constable, 1932.

A excellent quote to remember is this

When asked "Have we lost faith?" George Bernard Shaw replied, "Certainly not; but we have transferred it from God to the General Medical Council

This entertaining jaunt of a book is worth a good read. History tells us much about the GMC. Bernard Shaw was not fond of the organisation and was the first of the rebels. I am sure had he lived, he would have joined us in solidarity. I like Shaw's work. He is insightful and some of his ideas about the GMC is still true. This shows us that the place has not progressed in 100 years. MJA summarises it

"Nearly 100 years ago, George Bernard Shaw, in the preface to his play The doctor’s dilemma, savagely attacked the medical profession for its direct personal and pecuniary interest in the treatment of patients and argued that doctors could not be trusted to act in their patients’ best interests.1 He observed that medicine was not driven by science but rather by patient demand and service. Nor was Shaw particularly impressed with medical science, noting that “medical science is as yet very imperfectly differentiated from common curemongering witchcraft”. In short, he argued that the medical practice of his time was mostly ineffectual and that doctors should advise patients that wellness is not attained through a bottle of medicine but through decent housing, clothes, food and clean air. The doctor’s dilemma was that providing this advice would jeopardise his already meagre income".

Another interesting piece was written by Richard Smith. This was before he became a pretend blogger with delusions of radicalism. Helen Bright quite rightly mocks the bloggers at the BMJ. They cannot quite get there in terms of radicalism or persona. In the article on the GMC by Smith, he tells us that the GMC feels misunderstood. Of course, it feels misunderstood. After years of media driven judgments, interference with the Bristol Inquiry verdicts [ yes, we know about those Donald Irivine] and cosmetic solutions, the GMC is possibly quite lost. One of its flaws is never being able to bow down and admit an error. One can review this in the leading definition of infamous conduct [ Allinson v GMC]. Allinson was struck off for suggesting that smoking was linked to bad health/cancer. Anyhow, following the Doll study, the GMC did not offer him a posthumous pardon. Anyhow, those of you who walk into ASDA as I do will note Allinson's bread and flour. I buy Allinson's bread and consume it just to remember how conceited the GMC really are.

Since Allinson, not very many good things can be said of the GMC. Apart from Mark Ellen in their Information Team, they have nothing going for them. All the cosmetics they engage in, isn't really worth much at all.Nevertheless, perhaps they require makeovers to start afresh.

Anyhow, on the subject of modern times, Prof Catto and I had discussed the issue of disability. I had raised the issue of Death by Indifference, a report by Mencap, with him. I suggested that a consult was required, with immediate alterations to the student curriculum as well. That was in 2007.

By 2010, the consult was agreed.   Catto felt we were pushing an open door. I am not so convinced. Without Catto's support, the idea would have fallen flat on its face.

This decision by the GMC amused me somewhat because firstly I am aware no one at the GMC or elsewhere would be ready to admit where the idea originated from and secondly, it is always fascinating that a organisation so disabled by its own failings is now planning on improving the care of disabled people. Well, I had to give them credit for trying. I am not of course convinced by the GMC's sentiments. I am rather cynical and believe the GMC do require some good publicity after being thrown around by the public like a useless piece of meat. What better way to achieve this than imply that they support disabled people. Then perhaps I should stop being so cynical. It may be a habit really since Sushant Varma and I changed the face of ethnicity statistics at the GMC for good.Now doctors will be able to establish discrimination via statistics. In the past, no stats were available hence no doctor could establish discrimination.

A colleague quite rightly pointed out - when is the GMC going to implement their equality scheme on the disproportionate number of foreign graduates who are struck off. When do they plan on addressing the issue of racism in the NHS. Afterall, in 2008, Liam Donaldson accepted that racism does exist. Having agreed that it does exist, it is rather an irony that the misconduct test used in his case in the R v GMC Ex Parte Remedy UK was more lenient than that used with minority doctors. He wasn't complaining at this point :). 

So in conclusion, there are many things the GMC could improve on. They did though pick the subject with the most sympathy factor attached to it. Then that is Niall Dickson for you - he is an ex journalist after all. Whatever their motive, I have to accept that the move to address the issues affecting disabled people is a constructive one and perhaps it will improve healthcare in the future. Perhaps during the consult, the GMC can learn more about its own disabilities - it should understand that despite its disabilities and faults, it is an organisation capable of great things. All they have to do is try. 

Forgiveness

I have often been asked about letting bygones be bygones and forgiving people. There are some people I am able to forgive but there are some things that cannot ever be forgiven. As I am a great fan of history and the importance of it, my own brand of equalising most situations is to publicise events. I know full well that in history, those who push the boundaries can only go so far in a rigid medical establishment. It is for others to take the information, use it and carry on pushing those boundaries in the future. Information is always a way of gaining some kind of control for those who know how to use it. The Hebrews and Hammurabi Code had the right idea. The world doesn't progress without a minor element of an "eye for an eye".Of course, too much of it may make the world blind. On the other hand, without it, there would be no progress for a better future.

The product of this website is all about how dysfunctional the medical profession is. The worst issue about the UK's medical establishment is that they have no insight into their failings. It is this lack of insight that will finally be its own downfall.Of course, they don't know it yet :). That is what happens to those who haven't quite developed the intellectual capacity to review their own performance.

Andy Clayton Gets Struck Off [ About Time Too]

 Clayton's hospital desk drawer contained some interesting things

Way back in the past, I worked with Michelle Shepherd. Michele is a lovely consultant. One of the best. There was an amusing issue about Shepherd and the GMC. In 2007, the GMC crowed away about how staff grades could not use the term "Psychiatrist". This was before the Department of Health coughed up their entire list of staff grade "psychiatrists" and I whipped out the Michelle Shepherd reference. The reference referred to me as a "psychiatrist". The problem for the GMC is that Michelle had been one of their panellists. We all had to chortle at the GMC for their own stupidity.

Anyhow, Michelle and I  both had to tolerate Andy Clayton. The reason I left my job in Derby was because I did not wish to tolerate Clayton's sexist attitude. That was way back in 2001/2. Michele knew how I felt about Clayton. I made no formal complaint. The simple  way to solve the problem was to leave.

Anyway, Clayton got struck off recently, the BMJ runs the feature here. 

"A former consultant psychiatrist who examined the breasts of two vulnerable patients, subjected trainees to sexual innuendoes, and was convicted of child pornography offences has been struck off for behaviour "utterly incompatible with being a doctor."

Andy, if you are reading this, even staff grades can be right about you.  Congratulations to the GMC for removing this pervert off the medical shop floor.Ten years late but moving fast eh . The only reason the GMC acted is due to the criminal convictions. If that had not happened, Clayton would have been free to perv away. Afterall, he has been the same for more than 20 years. Its not a new thing.

Office of Judicial Complaints " Sir Scott Baker made an unfortunate mistake of the sort almost every judge, however conscientious, occasionally makes"

"It is understood why you took offence and Sir Scott Baker has apologised for his inadvertent mistake" OJC July 2010

Previously, on Ward 87 [ I have to really write this like a Soap Opera"], I went to court to seek justice not only for me but for a number of doctors who keep facing different tests of misconduct at the GMC. I came out of the court room having had my name changed. It had been changed overnight to "Dr Patel". Immediately, I wrote to the court. No response. Then that is nothing new :).

These days, you don't need Deedpoll. What you need to do is step into a Court room in the UK. The judge then changes your name immediately to the usual stereotypical name used for all Asian doctors.Better still, all ethnic minority doctors need to just line up at the Deedpoll office and automatically become Gujarati with the name Dr Patel before setting foot in any court in the UK.  Automatically, you rename your mum as Mummy Patel, your dad as Daddy Patel, your Goldfish as Sharky Patel  and so forth.

It then takes you 8 months to ensure the judge corrects your name within the judgement.  Actually, it takes the court 8 months to cough up the judgment. They only do so after clearing the judge :). I went to the Office of Judicial Complaints, not to win but for an admission from them that I had been referred to as Dr Patel. I obtained that and have been laughing all the way to the chocolate box :) ever since. In this world, you either watch Monte Python for a good laugh or you play with the judicial authorities. I play with the authorities when I am really bored. Indeed, I test the system out to see how effective it is. The OJC is generally pretty poor really.

The beauty of playing with the judicial authorities is that you start to understand the way they work. In the upper echelons of power, what is said is often not what is done. It is acutely important for any asian doctor facing the courts to understand this before setting foot there. Equality is only meant for speeches. In reality, there is no equality at all.

Lord Chief Justice Lord Judge once exclaimed "In the eyes of the law we are all equal". This was in one of a number of speeches given at the Equality in Justice Day. Lord Philips went onto say

"When we are appointed we take an oath or affirmation that we will administer justice ‘to do right to all manner of people after the laws and usages of this realm’. We act in accordance with that oath. We treat equally all who come before us, regardless of whether they are men or women, regardless of their race or religion and whether they are rich or poor"

And he continues

"So I can give you this assurance. Any man or woman who appears before a judge in this country will receive equal treatment in the administration of the law. The judge will treat each litigant in the same way. But the judge’s duty is to apply the law, whether he agrees with the law or not. So the important question is not ‘does the judge treat everyone equally?’ but ‘does the law treat everyone equally?’ In any society the answer to that question depends upon the motives, the beliefs, the attitudes, the prejudices or lack of prejudices of those who make the law"

Anyhow, for everyone's entertainment, here is the extract of the OJC letter by Sir Scott Baker.[See below] As we can see, Scott Baker is squealing away/slithering away and getting his fellow judges to support him.  It helps to have friends in high places. Of course, the bottom-line here is we can understand why Mohammed Al Fayed [ or would that be Mohammed Al Patel according to Sir Scott Baker] had no chance of success in the Diana Inquest. 

Please note below, Scott Baker made the same mistake 4 times and was unable to read my name on 120 sheets of paper in front of him. Now that is what we call UK justice :). Instead of taking the blame on himself, he went onto blame one of the junior members of his profession. This is called "passing the buck". Secondly, the fact is he couldn't be bothered to be accurate about the claimants' name. He then multiplied the complaints originally against me by 4 showing us all exactly how much attention he really paid to the papers in front of him. He then spent the vast majority of time denying that the GMC had a database to record doctors Fitness to Practise histories. Anyhow, this as we can all see is the quality of justice in the United Kingdom. Moreover, as the icing on the cake, all junior doctors get a "retired judge" while Liam Donaldson gets a Lord Justice and a Justice. This is what the court calls "Equality".

Anyhow, I shall leave this to the audience to assess whether this is an inadvertent mistake or a racist one :). It would be a bit like calling someone a "Paki" and calling it a " unfortunate mistake" due to the similarity to "Pakistani". There is one fabulous thing about being a judge, while they are unaccountable and are paid in excess of £192,000 per year, they are of the view that the public actually respect the work they do :).At some point, I must run a petition to reduce their salary down by half. No reason the tax payer should fund this kind of slip shod behaviour. 

Anyhow, Sir Scott Baker once stated that there was no prejudice to a doctor to have a closed complaint. I am only following his judgment when I feature it here :). Complaints against judges are a secret. The public can officially accept that Dr Rita Pal made a formal complaint of behaviour contrary to the Race Relations Act against Sir Scott Baker, he was cleared much like I was with the GMC. The feature online thus causes him no prejudice at all. No member of the public could reasonably even think that Sir Scott Baker may well have a attitude contrary to the Race Relations Act. No one could even speculate upon the issue or hold the view that he could just be a racist pompous member of the judiciary [ technically now retired]. Of course, why I wasn't mistaken for Dr Pelling or any other name is beyond me. After this, every ethnic minority person would have the confidence that this judge is not racist :) [ I am only repeating the judges own judgment about doctors who apparently suffer no prejudice following closed complaints].

We can treat this like the judicial fitness to practise history and database . A bit like the one possessed by the GMC. For the record, the GMC denied the existence of a database collecting a doctor's fitness to practise history [negative or positive findings]. Scott Baker  denied the existence of a database. The FOIA request from the GMC sent to my colleague confirmed the existence of this database :). All good answers to dishonesties in court come swiftly to those who wait.

Anyhow, please review the extract below :). Excellent admission as I had the tape recordings first :). Of course, I really want to know how many mistakes a judge is allowed to make before he really is perceived as an idiot.

July 2010. OJC to Dr Rita Pal :).

"There is no dispute that Sir Scott Baker referred to you as ‘Dr Patel’. When he was contacted for permission for officials to request the court recording (an entirely routine courtesy) he immediately gave permission, but also took the opportunity to say that, without at that stage having recourse to the transcript, if he had referred to you as Dr Patel, then he was extremely sorry for his oversight and he gave his assurance that he had intended no offence. He observed that he would have expected your counsel to bring this to his attention at the time. If this had been done it would have afforded him an immediate opportunity to correct the court record and apologise directly to you.

It is clearly a sensitive matter to refer to anyone by the wrong name and perhaps particularly so if there can be racial or other associations. It is understood why you took offence and Sir Scott Baker has apologised for his inadvertent mistake.

There is no evidence that in referring to you as ‘Dr Patel’ for a short time on four occasions Sir Scott Baker was deliberately seeking to offend. For the remainder of the hearing he referred to you by your correct name. On the evidence available, Sir Scott Baker made an unfortunate mistake of the sort almost every judge, however conscientious, occasionally makes. When drawn to his attention he has immediately apologised.

It is an unfortunate and regrettable slip. If you or your counsel had brought his mistake to his attention at the time he would have been able to apologise to you directly. He has now done so. It is not, however, a matter of judicial misconduct"

The Wicked Lady

There is a very old film starring Margaret Lockwood. It is worth watching. In the modern day, we observe a different kind of Wicked Lady.

Over the last few weeks, on NHS Exposed, we have been eating popcorn and watching the events regarding a lady named Penny Mellor unfold. Of course, we had all discovered Mellor, exposed her and ensured her judgment was on the internet in the year 2007. In 2007 though few paid much attention.  The BMJ has continually supported Penny Mellor. I suspect Fiona Godlee likes the kind of rough road campaigner gracing her drab journal.

Mellor's ego will no doubt he flattered by the features run by the BMJ, Hospital Doctor and various bloggers. Most of these features have been less than insightful. They have all looked upon the situation from a very superficial level and few journalists have understood the advanced nature of Mellor's ability to waste public finances and doctors' subs. Mellor is like a infamous highway man who is fast becoming a bad legend. Over the years, sheets and sheets of paper have been dedicated to her. Nothing has happened though. Mellor continues as she has always done.

Of course, peaks and troughs of her antics were featured back in he late 1990s. Her infamy waxes and wanes and essentially, the Child Protection Professionals are controlled by her. The situation is a bit like S and M. She hits them and they wonder around the medical profession whining about it. The cycle happens again. The problem though is that this cycle has been ongoing for a decade or more with no end in sight. They have become much like the children who are abused - unable to control their destiny or fate.

PACA is essentially a limp organisation who have never believed in action.  They do believe in garnering sympathy and publicity for a situation they have never been able to control. Nothing has actually improved for them in the last decade or more. They have taken no action under the Harassment Act or Defamation Act. They relied on me to remove msbp.com and then remained ungrateful about it, opting never to mention my name in polite company at all. For years, these child protection whined about msbp.com until someone like me went and dealt with it.

Nevertheless, looked at this situation from an objective point of view - what is fascinating is Penny Mellor's ability to make the entire profession of child protection run around her. Of course, this fits with her diva like tendencies. Divas often like those who pay attention to them [ whether it be negative or positive attention]. Secondly, Mellor has developed an advanced method of taking advantage of the GMC's procedures. She ensures the allegations are flamboyant such as "murder or mayhem" and she ensures there are multiple complainants. These are the two ingredients required for the complaint to go past the preliminary stages.  For instance, if there were 1600 doctors complaining about Liam Donaldson, the complaint would go through but sadly one complaint by Remedy UK meant that the pattern for initial triage was never met.  The GMC have yet to declare her a vexatious complainant but then she knows how to play most people.

This is not the first time, the General Medical Council have taken her seriously. Back in the past, they held a secret meeting with her and her operatives. Then we all know that the GMC is infiltrated with Scientologists with their own agenda. It is simply that PACA is in denial of these elements of evidence and have never understood the gravity the problem. PACA was created not to protect children but to ensure paediatricians hid behind each other against Penny Mellor. It then dissipated research and articles in support of their agenda. Few research papers written by their members have any declaration to their membership with PACA. Of course, while sympathy has been gained for their cause, they have no solution for Mellor. Of course, I often have a solution and like the msbp.com website, I could have taken action in the year 2007. I though felt that some people need to develop some balls and take the bull by the horns. It is now 2010 and PACA have  not developed a set of balls. It will be 2020 and they will be in the same situation - their solution to the problem being repeated articles about Mellor which essentially propagate her infamy and essentially push her into the legendary status.

Anyhow, it is interesting that many bloggers et al have taken 3 years to mention them.  The penny has apparently dropped that Mellor is a serial complainant. Of course, the GMC and many authorities including the Attorney General have been hemorrhaging money into her tales for years. I often wonder whether the current government will notice the large pit where public money has been squandered.

It is though fascinating to watch one woman rule the medical profession. The medical profession being so inept that they have failed at each juncture to take adequate action against her. No doubt they will make her into a legend much like the Wicked Lady. 

Declared Conflict.  R v GMC Ex Parte Pal [ dual complaint by Mellor and her team that was thrown out before Rule 7].

Dangerous Eccentric and Ex Jail Bird on Child Protection Working Party :)

Qualifications - None

I choked on my cornflakes today while reading this press release. I had to howl with laughter at the GMC's primary choice on the Working Party.  Many may like to refer to these notable infamous pieces. 

1. Domain Name Bungle
2. Download the judgment  on the Wicked Conspirator
3. Scientology.

Just to summarize this, the GMC has invited an ex convict to its Working Party :).Perhaps the GMC will invest in some Teletubbies DVDs and sit her in the corner to learn the basics first.

GMC announces review of child protection guidance

Press Release

15 Jul 2010

A working group is to produce new guidance for doctors involved in child protection

The working group's members come from different perspectives but they are all committed to developing clear guidance for doctors which will promote good practice and benefit vulnerable children.

Niall Dickson, GMC Chief Executive

The General Medical Council has announced that Rt. Hon. Lord Justice Thorpe, Deputy Chair of the Family Justice Council and Lord Justice of Appeal will chair a working group to produce new guidance for doctors involved in child protection.

The working group has been asked to develop guidance that will help doctors involved in this complex and challenging area of practice to interpret and apply the standards expected by the GMC.

The group has 14 members including 7 doctors from a number of specialities and 7 lay members. It includes individuals from a range of backgrounds with an understanding of both children's and parents' perspectives.

The Working Group will:

* Review the content of relevant GMC guidance against significant developments regarding doctors' roles in child protection (such as Good Medical Practice; 0-18 years: guidance for all doctors, Confidentiality, and Acting as an expert witness)

* Identify and consider any guidelines other organisations have published on issues related to doctors in child protection work and how this might inform or complement GMC guidance.

* Engage with a range of experts on the challenges and practical difficulties doctors face undertaking child protection work, and to seek the views of key interests.

* Decide the scope and structure of new guidance, taking account of other GMC guidance.

* Recommend a draft of the guidance to the GMC

* Oversee and analyse the outcome of a formal consultation exercise.

* Consider, and advise on, ways in which the new guidance could be disseminated, promoted, and used, and its impact evaluated.

Niall Dickson, the Chief Executive of the General Medical Council, said:

"Lord Justice Thorpe brings a wealth of experience and expertise to this important role - providing doctors who work in child protection with guidance that will help them in their day to day work is vital. We need to build confidence in what will always be a difficult area of practice. The working group's members come from different perspectives but they are all committed to developing clear guidance for doctors which will promote good practice and benefit vulnerable children".

The Rt. Hon. Lord Justice Thorpe, Chair of the Working Group on Child Protection, said:

"I am delighted to be asked to chair the group. I very much hope that the initiative the GMC has taken will contribute to the future in which doctors feel secure in contributing to child protection procedures, including giving expert evidence to the courts."

The fourteen members of the Working Group are:

* The Rt. Hon. Lord Justice Thorpe (Chair), Deputy Chair of the Family Justice Council, Lord Justice of Appeal

GMC Council members:

* Dr John Jenkins, Consultant Paediatrician

* Ms Ros Levenson, Independent Researcher and Policy Consultant

* Professor Terrence Stephenson, President, RCPCH

Other Working Group members:

* Dr Keith Brent, Consultant Paediatrician

* Ms Anne Goymer, UK Strategic Lead Health, Barnado's

* Dr Danya Glaser, Consultant Child & Adolescent Psychiatrist

* Dr Diane Hart, Principal Officer, National Children's Bureau

* Dr Kathleen Lessells, Retired GP and Medical Adviser for Fostering and Adoption

* Ms Bridget Lindley, Deputy Chief Executive and Legal Adviser, Family Rights Group

* Baroness McIntosh, House of Lords

* Mrs Penny Mellor, Parent Advocate

* Dr Heather Payne, Consultant Paediatrician

* Dr Rosalyn Proops, Consultant Paediatrician

All members have been asked to serve as individuals, rather than as representatives of organisations.

The new guidance will complement and support guidance already developed by the General Medical Council which sets out the key ethical values that must underpin practice, including 0-18 years: guidance for all doctors; Consent: patients and doctors making decisions together and Confidentiality.

The group has been asked to produce the new guidance by the end of 2011, and will begin the process by issuing a call for evidence this summer. The Working Group will seek both oral and written evidence from a wide range of individuals and organisations, to understand the issues from different perspectives. More details about this process will be announced shortly.

Twelfth Hour

Child Protection is a bit like whistleblowing. Similar traits can be observed. In each case, the GMC doesn't know what the hell it is doing. Doctors find themselves in trouble if they raise concerns. They also find themselves in trouble if they don't raise concerns. Most of the time, no one knows what they are supposed to do. They are damned if they do and damned if they don't. During these cases, the General Medical Council can be observed to be a hapless regulatory body running around like headless chickens pleasing the media. In the middle of it all, children are failed and doctors are struck off.

Anyhow, after the campaign instigated by PACA and others [ which hasn't done much to increase the understanding of the public], the GMC have decided to review the Child Protection Guidance. Essentially, this is the kind of " Please help, we haven't a f*** clue what we are doing, can an eminent judge tell us what to do". Having prosecuted, stripped all child protection doctors naked, ruined their livelihoods, ensured most are struck off or dead, the GMC have now decided to find out what the problem is. 

Niall told the world.

         ‘We need to build confidence in what will always be a difficult area of practice.

‘The working group’s members come from different perspectives but they are all committed to developing clear guidance for doctors which will promote good practice and benefit vulnerable children.’

Lord Justice Thorpe piped up : ‘I very much hope that the initiative the GMC has taken will contribute to the future in which doctors feel secure in contributing to child protection procedures, including giving expert evidence to the courts.’

Niall has clearly been polishing his head after being embarrassed in their recent loss at the Court of Appeal and a series of damning articles criticising them that were featured in the RSM journal. Essentially, the GMC has been left shattered and burnt. This is what happens to regulatory bodies who continue to please the media and don't listen. Well, there may be hundreds of children dead, many doctors struck off or dead but the GMC are doing their thing - 10 years late.

It is only a matter of time before the GMC is hit with the Whistleblowing issue. That is simply a time bomb of injustices waiting to explode in the GMC's face. My question is, how many patients died due to the GMC's behaviour in cases of whistleblowing.

The Misfits

Helen Bright is going through a phase of chocolate, designer shoes and Marilyn Monroe movies. I am a huge fan of old movies. I have this encyclopedic knowledge of the 30s,40s and 50s films. Well, I have to win at something when playing Trivial Pursuit. One of my character flaws was to be extremely competitive. This character flaw can often drive people to destruction if it is not kept in check. This is possibly the reason why I tend to be meticulous in everything I do. That was also part of the problem between me and the GMC. I know the GMC better than it knows itself. I know quirky little facts like Allinson's bread sold in Sainsbury's was once the invention of Dr Allinson, struck off for suggesting that smoking was linked to ill health. Allinson v GMC was also the first version of professional misconduct. Just for the record, I bake with Allinson's flour and eat Allinson's bread. I possibly do this out of respect for Dr Allinson while collecting my Nectar points. It is this kind of attention to detail that is achieved just by determination and competitiveness. Achieving vindication was a competition and a race. I wasn't about to allow the system to beat me. I recognise this trait in other doctors as well. It is probably something to do with the constant state of competitiveness we are asked to exist in, in the medical profession. There is something unhealthy about it in many ways. It took me quite a while to understand that I didn't have to compete - the sun would still rise tomorrow.

One of the movies starring Marilyn Monroe and Clark Gable was The Misfits. Written by the eminent Arthur Miller, Monroe's then husband, it was a interesting study of people. It has always reminded me of the position of Whistleblowers in society. Most of us are totally lost in our own world. This is something every whistleblower finds themselves in. Their perfectionism, their vision of a perfect world, their determination for honesty or integrity and their competitiveness drives them to achieve vindication. This eventually  cuts the  string between them and average society. They begin to exist as a individual entity - something that many people fear. Humans classically exist in cliques and groups. Few are individualists.

I know I could be in he company of many many people but have a sub processor running in my head dissecting and problem solving on how to get through another hurdle placed in my path to vindication. Some people call it an obsession. I simply call it intellectual progress or challenges. I doubt any university or school can teach you how to exist successfully as a Misfit. While most people in society would be ashamed to be a Misfit, I tend to be proud of being a little different, a little off the wall, a little eccentric and a amazingly unpredictable to certain sectors of the world.

I must have spent years concealing my past as a whistleblower from many people and it took me a long time to develop my self confidence so that I could be proud of who I was. Medicine is all about your peers making you feel ashamed of being who you are. Whistleblowers are taboo, they are often judged as failures of some kind, they are often mocked for the predicament they find themselves in and they often walk around society with a plastic mask. It is the plastic face that fools everyone into thinking you are just Ms Jo Bloggs. Whistleblowing is meant to be some deep dark dirty secret, never to be told to the outside world.

Being a whistleblower is my past, I cannot get away from it. I had spent a long time running from it until I understood that I couldn't run from myself.  It has carved my persona, dictated who I have become and sent me through many many adventures through various storms. I survived it all and  I should be proud of it.  I would call Whistleblowing a type of evolution that determines your identity.  It is much like pressing the fast forward button and learning about more things than average people do in their lifetime. The few things I have learned is that you cannot run from yourself and you cannot change the past. The best thing to do is to accept your past and move to the future.The only aspect of your life that can be changed is the future.

Fat Birds and Being a Blogger

Dr No is a Fat Bird

Dr No has moaned about the fact that bloggers are becoming as extinct as the Dodo. I often compare Dr No to a large fat dim bird with a facade of apparent intelligence. Dr No has returned to the blogsphere after a  short spell following the disaster between Kate Middleton, him and another medical blogger [who was due for a GMC hearing]. Dr No didn't make matters simple but decided to stab his long term friend in the proverbial back. Middleton in her wisest time decided to disclose Dr No's name to the General Medical Council. during a uncontrolled rant. 

Of course, because the General Medical Council is relatively dim, they failed to make note of who he was and why he had written an anonymous "opinion" for Kate Middleton's complaint. Kate as usual had lost her temper and ranted at the GMC but did not understand the impact of her rant. I don't blame Kate as she was not to know the ways of the GMC.

The side effect of all this was that Kate's correspondence was inserted into Medical Blogger 2's hearing file. So after a great big panic attack on all fronts including that of Dr No, it was left to me to provide the arguments and to enable an extraction of these documents. Dr No was not convinced I could do it. These damaging documents were simply rants that had nothing to do with the allegations against Medical Blogger 2. This is the kind of thing that could happen to any doctor.

I managed this of course no thanks to Kate or Dr No who were both quite happy to allow Medical Blogger 2 [and Dr No's long term "Friend" ] fry at the General Medical Council. I on the other hand was not in the mood to allow Medical Blogger 2 to fry and indeed she didn't fry but won a reduction of the conditions on her GMC Registration. This is no thanks to Dr No.This is why Medical Blogger 2 who continues to blog has been missed off his list :).

During all this Dr No had withheld the fact that he fraternised with Kate Middleton - so much so that he had written an anonymous opinion for her GMC complaint. Following that, they were both quite happy watch  Medical Blogger 2 in trouble. They all sat there intellectually pontificating while there was an emergency brewing.

Blogger 2 had explained that she could not do a expert opinion for Kate Middleton which is the conversation that ended up at GMC Towers. What is interesting here  - the person who was honest about her dealings, had to deal with fire at the GMC. The person who did most things covertly and was the cause of the disaster - i.e Dr No failed to be frank. Lets face it, given the fragile nature of Kate Middleton, he should not have developed a pointless anonymous report. Despite Dr No's so called intellectual prowess. He is proud of this and gloats about it frequently. No doubt he stands in front of the mirror and crows " Mirror Mirror on the Wall, who is the most intelligent one of them all". Anyhow, as everyone will observe on Kate's blog, Dr No lost the complaint and Neil Marshall threw the complaint out. One had to congratulate Marshie Pops for this decision. He is unaware how much entertainment it caused me not because of Kate [ as it is understandably disappointing] but the knock to Dr No's ego. Apparently, the GMC cannot prove that Dr No wrote the anonymous report :). How amusing is that. All the GMC has to do is used the Medical Act and request the material from Kate Middleton and hey presto :). Anyhow, I won't go into this further because Dr No always frazzles under pressure.

In his post he makes a snide cutting remark about the fact that I blog because I think I am worth it. On the contrary, I blog on Ward 87 for other doctors in a similar predicament to me and to improve my formulation of ideas. The fact that people read this blog is a complete surprise to me as I make no efforts to publicise it. My purely selfish motive is to improve my intellectual capacity and my writing style. It is due to blogging that I have a photographic memory of news events and information. My writing style still requires much work as everyone is aware.

I blog on NHS Exposed Blog for members of the public. Secondly, he makes the point that I am not on the medical register and hence it is safe for me to blog. He fails to point out that I was there before Dr Crippen in the year 2001 when I started http://www.nhsexposed.com. I blogged and wrote all the way through my GMC Registration. When I return back to the Register in the future, I will no doubt continue to blog and write. When I do return to the register, anything I have written while off the register will still be online and I shall be accountable for it. Dr No's version  is really quite simplistic.

That said, blogging is largely an american idea. In this country, most backward NHS Consultants consider it the work of "oddballs" or "weirdos" because they have no concept of the reasons for blogging. In my case, I also blog for historical reasons. I am a great believer in keeping records about the past and I really cannot allow the BMJ or any other boring journal to dictate history because there is the flip side of the coin to consider.Every reader deserves an alternative viewpoint. When I was younger, I felt that we as young doctors were robbed due to the establishment's control of medical publications. Free thought was not part of the establishment's agenda.

As for the General Medical Council, they would have been after my neck whether I blogged or not. It is just annoying for the British Establishment that their most hated whistleblower [ evidenced based] is still annoyingly around. The General Medical Council as the British Establishment [ whether this is the seniors of the profession or freemasonry] have historically disliked being challenged. It is for this reason, the GMC have actively sought to try and control the internet. The internet is a danger to their very existence ie establishment control. It is in the GMC's interests to ensure doctors are not able to think laterally or consider their position in this current world of medicine. This is why there is Common Purpose control of Doctors.net.uk and maximum medical media control through the British Medical Association. These are not conspiracy theories, this is just the way things work in the British Establishment. They have been successful in many ways because compared to the profession in India or any other country, the UK's doctors are relatively quiet, they mumble a lot about bad conditions but in the end they are unable to sustain their onslaught against the establishment. It all comes down to the GMC Registration. It is a sword of damocles. Anyone who is seen to challenge the establishment is essentially taken out. 

By way of an example, I would like to use this memo once issued against me. The author Dr Gerry Murphy is currently due for a GMC hearing for misleading various people [ Sarah Jane McNicholas case]. He writes 

"She is attempting to subvert the authority of individuals like the Postgraduate Dean, Medical Director, Educational Supervisor etc. This authority needs to exist in order for the NHS and Postgraduate Education to function in a proper manner"

" I don't imagine that even if she were struck off, she would stop her activities but it could reduce their credibility". 

The thought processes of the establishment in this memo is rather obvious. It is quite easy really to dismiss me as yet another crackpot on the internet. What is more difficult is to accept that I am a fairly intelligent, knowledgeable and stable person who often makes evidence based statements. I am a scientist afterall. There are bloggers like Dr No who talk and there are bloggers like me who live in the real world and detail their experiences of the medical profession online. Despite Dr No's flaws as a person [and he has many of them much like me], he is an interesting blogger who tries to challenge the establishment from a oblique viewpoint. This is a little different to me who challenges the status quo face on. Some would say [ from a completely society viewpoint] that it has not done me much good - then again, it depends what is important in your life - the trappings of society or to live with some element of freedom. It is a purely personal choice. I certainly never wanted to lead an ordinary life.

Hey there, Are you Alive?

The GMC need not call on Ghostbusters Today.

The electromagnetic field provided ex medical ghosts

 would have destroyed all their hard drives and put them out of business.

It's now nearly day 4 since disaster struck and my friend took an overdose. Luckily, he is back in action and today he told me he had things to do and couldn't be on the phone for long. Yee, Haa, this guy is back in action. OK, so he is getting fed up of my phonecalls every 8 hours and texts to see if he is still in the land of the living. Yes, I need to check. Today's conversation was " Hi, Are you Alive". Answer "Yes". I then replied " OK then, call me over the weekend" and put the phone down. So, now these exchanges are becoming amusing. Even he finds them amusing. No doubt, I shall be ringing him up with my usual skewed sense of humour and will explain to him that dying isn't cheap. .

In the hey day of medical school, I used to work at a funeral company doing invoices and communicating with funeral parlors. It was probably the best job I ever did. Nevertheless, funerals are damned expensive. Extra large coffins are even more expensive. Believe me, I had never seen so many zeros in all my life. This is the reason dying while fat is so uncool. Too many pallbearers to pay etc etc.

For that reason, the frugal option is to stay alive. I shall impress this upon my friend over the next few weeks.  He tries to be frugal but sadly retail therapy courtesy of the GMC sets in and personally I think any therapy is better than opting to meet the maker. There is no point at all making funeral companies richer when that money can be spent on Druckers cakes instead. This is my logic anyway.

So life is peachy, my friend is busy. I can now stop worrying. Emergency over. Fab!

Survival

When life becomes a series of survival techniques, I am not sure what quality of life doctors have. My friend survived his ordeal yesterday but only just. I was scared shitless .

I often look at myself and wonder what would have happened had the dark tower succeeded in punishing me through their Fitness to Practise Procedures. Some people call me brave for surviving the GMC. The actual honest truth is that I didn't want to end up sitting at the side of Beachy Head contemplating how I was going to die. I am not brave at all. I just know what I want and what I don't want.

Luckily, I have this thing about dying while fat. I consider it totally uncool to be found dead while being overweight without proper lingerie. In my view, death has to be cool and while I am uncool, death is uncool. As silly as this sounds, this is what has prevented me from heading towards the edge. So, there always has to be something that prevents you and reels you back into living your life.

I have always known that the GMC would have driven me to the edge and have taken stock of the situation and stopped them from doing this to me. I think recognising limitations is important. I was never brave enough to face a GMC hearing. This was probably the reason I have litigated against the GMC and fought to survive. Part of litigation is having some modicum of control over a situation. The GMC has this way of making you feel powerless over your life and over everything you do. So, I suppose litigation for me was part of survival. There have been periods in the past were I have just survived from day to day. You eat, you sleep, you watch TV and you wait till the sinking feeling related to the GMC disappears.This often takes effort in the initial stages.

We all have demons in our mind's eye. I think the GMC brings the worst out in doctors. My first way to survive was to alter my mindset and understand that the GMC isn't important in the grand scale of the universe. I often look up at the sky and consider how fragile we all are. A meteor could drop on us in a second and we would all be dead.  So, I really wouldn't have wanted my life to be spent fighting the GMC, one day after another. The GMC has blighted my life in many ways and while I can forget what has been done to me, I cannot forgive or forget what has been done to my friends and colleagues who have been weakened under their tyranny. Perhaps this is the reason I write about various issues on the internet. I would hate the history books to have omitted this dark face of the GMC. The GMC basement may be extended to accommodate for more corpses but one thing is for sure, one day people are going to find out about atrocities meted out on innocent doctors. Until that day, it is important for us all to play our part in raising concerns about our colleagues and friends so the vulnerable and the dead are not forgotten.

I  consider myself fortunate and every day I value the fact I am still living.  This is why I make the most of each day because I remember the days when I simply survived. Freedom is important. Freedom to live is even more important. I think once doctors understand the value of life, the importance of the GMC falls by the wayside. Through all my internal debates about life, death, the world, this is the conclusion I came to. While many doctors deal with life and death from a scientific view, few understand that their own lives should be cherished and protected no matter what.

As they say - Carpe Diem.

Devastated

My friend who has been harassed by the General Medical Council for 4 years took an overdose today. I blame the Medical Protection Society for their substandard representation. I blame the General Medical Council for their disgusting behaviour.

What has it come to? We were all once junior doctors happily working in the NHS only 6 years ago. I now see half my friends within the GMC and half of them crumbling under the pressure that they are placed under by the dark tower. They are being driven to suicide. I hate this happening to them.

In the meantime, there is me - watching this all unfold around me, trying desperately to ensure that they are supported as much as possible through what little any of us can do.

I live my days and my nights and refuse to be beaten by anything and yes, this takes effort. I don't understand why my friends can't develop the idea that the GMC are irrelevant and should not be allowed to control the lives of so many.

When I found out my friend Debra Shepherd had hung herself following a GMC investigation, I decided to continue to write material against the General Medical Council for her sake.

The GMC are now killing innocent doctors and there is nothing we can do about it. This is a terrible situation.

I am devastated.

The Tale of Ali Baba and the Forty Thieves

Niall Dickson Hires Baliffs

Dr Pakistan's antics are infamous. He challenged the GMC on the basis of a absurd warning on his surgical practise that essentially assassinated his career prospects. About two years on, Dr Pakistan's challenge against it has brought him nothing but misery. His court challenge against it failed because the judge just didn't understand what the issues were and the GMC spun a yarn. Nothing new there then. Anyhow, the problem with courts is the art of costs. I often get tired of costs threats probably because it doesn't frazzle me at all. These lawyers are often such tiresome creatures. Each time they get scared, they squeal away about costs like a mini pot bellied pig.

Anyhow, costs against Dr Pakistan escalated into court orders and those brought the Baliffs to his door. Of course, there is no stopping this. It does though make us all understand that the GMC are essentially nothing more than the  thieves. They stole his career, stole his livelihood and having made him penniless, they then decided to send the heavies around to strip him of his belongings. That of course tonight's - Arabian Night. A tale of warning that all those who dare challenge the GMC will be chased for costs and then ballifs. This is just another take of the level the GMC often stoops to. I suppose the next thing they can do is sell tickets for Beachy Head.