Ward 87

The CopyCat Trail - Peter Bottomley, Phil Hammond et al http://www.edm2031.blogspot.com/

2011-09-13T09:19:00.001-07:00

Struck off and Die. Rough cut, Sexy and Hot

2010-10-22T03:41:00.000-07:00

When I was at medical school, a number of us girlies had a huge crush on Struck off and Die. I was included in this group. We all went crazy each time Struck off and Die appeared anywhere. Indeed, if we could have got time off from our lectures at UCL, we would have gone to their theatre doors, mobbed them, stripped their shirts, tied them up in our stockings and dragged them home with us. Sadly, we had to behave ourselves. Struck off and Die consisted of Phil and Tony [ with some accessories]. They burst into the medical scene and took the piss out of the medical profession so much that none of us took our seniors seriously. This medical duo was the most successful team in history. They had us all rolling on the floor laughing. For us, medical school was no longer miserable. It was a series of piss takes, of adapting the Struck off and Die humour and it was about two men making us believe that there was humour in everything.

Their tapes were copied in multiples and circulated around the girls. We loved Struck off and Die possibly because they were not only "hot" but extremely witty [a rarity when it comes to men]. While we attended lectures, we had our Walkmans on listening to Struck off and Die and not the actual lectures. Professor Woolf and his boring pathology lectures was switched off until the bit where we could collect the handout. Phil and Tony influenced all of us. Overnight, fun was injected into our drab medical school.

When I grew up to be a whistleblower some years later, I wrote to Private Eye and was finally emailing a sexpot - Phil Hammond. This is one of the perks of whistleblowing - I get to fraternise with some devilishly handsome and talented men. Of course, Phil is not only sexy by email but my mates who checked him out and sized him up at his show tell me that he still retains his hotpot, sexpot persona. No one is really sure what part of Phil's anatomy is the sexiest. I decided upon his brain, possibly because I haven't been given the opportunity to examine the rest. Actually, we don't care whether some woman has caught Phil in her fishnets, and is examining him 20 times a day, the important thing is this - we get to practise our observational skills. Tony has apparently become a "Lovie" and is wallowing around with the rich and famous. With his dark hair and gruffly voice, no doubt he remains irresistible to womankind.

For two years, I have grovelled and begged Phil for a autographed picture of Struck off and Die. I told him that the preference really was a picture devoid of clothing. To the common man - this was a request for the Full Monty. Anyhow, shy boys tend to remain shy so I finally got the above emailed to me this morning.

I am of the view that if you work hard at anything you end up getting it. This meant nagging Phil for months and like all men, they have to give up sometime. The Struck off and Die tapes still remain somewhere on the net. It is a great shame that no one actually develops this into CD/DVD status. The sense of humour sparkles on there and I still believe it was the best thing to hit the United Kingdom. Phil and Tony were at their best and they ripped through the medical profession further than any other medical scalpel.

I still love their sense of humour. Its sassy, it's dirty and it's sharp.

Here is hoping that Struck off and Die [Gold] returns on CD or DVD or any other form. For now, Phil Hammond is on tour - for details check out his website here.

Good Pasta

2010-10-21T13:29:00.000-07:00

It has indeed been a strange week. I discovered that my best friend from university is now a famous photographer. We had lost touch for more than 20 years and I was so proud of her. I realised what a difference she had made to my thinking patterns and how she potentially taught me to think out of the box. This is the wonderful thing about art students. They tend to view the world in a different way, a kind of beautiful way. My friend was known for her pasta. While she would wait for her one lecture a week, while the rest of us slogged our guts out in the lecture theatre, my friend ended up feeding all of us. Believe me, when you are tired and overworked, some good pasta does not go amiss. Out of the disastrous friendships I have experienced with doctors, my friendship with this girl was a welcome reminder of how good times were. The difference was that she did not judge me - just accepted me for who I was. That's important in any friendship. So, yes, I have fond memories and the more I contemplate my friendships with many art students, the more I realise that the medical culture was never suited to me. There is honestly something dysfunctional about it. I miss a certain type of person. The type of person that views the world with a pleasant, sympathetic eye rather than the crass vision developed through the medical lens.

On the other side of the coin, I heard that another whistleblower was being prosecuted by the General Medical Council. I am still not sure what planet the GMC are on. Why on earth do they do this to honest, decent junior doctors. Doctors often believe that they will eventually be vindicated and wait patiently. That time never comes. As soon as the clawed hand touches your career, you are effectively finished. Any other view is essentially denial. In the end, the GMC does not look on whistleblowers with sympathy. Their modus operandi is to protect the establishment. Yes, I am sad about this. I think some juniors deserve a break. The GMC does not share that viewpoint. Kindness is not in their vocabulary. This is what is so dysfunctional about them. The GMC would walk over the dead. Indeed, they frequently do.

Lansley's Cosmetics

2010-10-13T17:48:00.000-07:00

No substance beyond Lansley's Cosmetics.

Those of us who are not new to the business of whistleblowing understand that the changes proposed by Andrew Lansley are essentially a pile of pants. This is the new consultation document. Of course, there is no point in sending your view point in because the Department of Health and Coalition Government have already cherry picked their favourite half wits. These half-wits are largely the British Medical Association and their sheepdog Hamish Mildew. On the patients side, the coalition government have cherry picked the Patients Association. For all of you who don't know, the Patients Association is a barrister aligned with Common Purpose and a Freemason in the form of Sandy Macara. The man who essentially runs some of it is barely out of medical school. Anyhow, these are the advisers to El Gov at present. Oops I forgot Public Concern at Work - whose only concern is to harvest whistleblowers so that their concerns don't see the light of day. They work with the Department of Health [ admitted by Nicholson himself]

It should be noted that when a number of whisteblowers approached David Nicholson and requested a meeting to discuss improvements for whistleblowers, the Department of Health refused to meet with them. The consultation is therefore rather like a party where no one is actually invited. Gate crashers are not welcome of course.

The changes by Lansley largely concentrate on the employment contract. For whistleblowers, they would still have to seek a remedy in the courts - and that is a lengthy process. The Department of Health has no recognition of the obstacles faced by most whistleblowers. For instance, you aren't a whistleblower unless your concerns have been vindicated. That is a long haul for most people. Before that has been done, anything could happen - you could lose your job, be referred to the GMC, be disciplined etc. Until and unless there is established evidence to your concerns, no one can actually hold the title whistleblower. Of course, we know that Count Rubin of the GMC once told the world that all concerns in good faith would be accepted. In the same phase of the moon, the GMC prosecuted a doctor for raising vexatious concerns without proper basis. It should also be noted that I was investigated for 2 long years without my knowledge. Despite internal reports that I had already been vindicated, these were not disclosed to me for 5 more years. During that time, the Department of Health and the GMC gleefully mocked me for having "no basis to my concerns". Having done so, I was subjected to revolving door investigations that no one paid much heed to. If this is mentioned to Lansley, he simple ignores it and walks away.The implication here is that I could not command the title "whistleblower" until I obtained the evidence to vindicate myself. In my view, the cultural attitude of the Department of Health, the BMA and all bodies involved in the National Health Service are the biggest threat to patient safety and whistleblowers. They continue to treat whistleblowers with contempt and are largely dismissive of their concerns, recommendations etc.

The suggestions postulated by Lansley are largely ill founded. The reason for this is that the policy makers have failed to understand the main problems involved in whistleblowing. For instance, contractual changes does not prevent the GMC, the NPSA or any other organisation from harassing the whistleblower under the guise of "public interest". Lansley attempts to make it compulsory for health professionals to whistleblow without addressing the fact that organisations like the NMC [ infamous for their disgraceful treatment of Margaret Haywood] and the GMC [ well known for hounding and abusing whistleblowers] have failed to protect whistleblowers. The Medical Act is all supreme. The main mothership is still free to attack any whistleblower - at anytime and any place.

The changes proposed by Lansley are largely cosmetic. To the uninitiated, it will appear that El Gov is being pro-active about whistleblowers. In reality, it is nothing but lip service. This is the government who is reluctant to call a Health Select Committee Review on Whistleblowing with a view to developing proper solutions based on evidence. Perhaps they fear the fact that all the UK's skeletons will fall out of the closet in one go.

I remain unimpressed with Lansley's proposals. I also remain unimpressed with the attitude of the Coalition Government who are certainly unilateral decision makers developing policies with their clique. Until the government is ready to develop come kind of communication with ALL whistleblowers, it is unlikely to develop robust policies to protect the whistleblowers. Had these changes been in place in 1998, it would not have protected me. Lansley's problem is that he is listening to the wrong people.

No doubt Lansley wishes to bring these changes in so that he can tell the Mid Staffordshire Inquiry " look, its all changed now". Of course, that is the modus operandi of all organisations. Each year they tell us that circumstances are better for whistleblowers and each year there is another scandal. This is just another one of the establishments manner of pretending that "all will be well" so that there is no scrutiny of the past. Without scutiny of the past, there is no feedback mechanism for improvement. Without a logical approach to the assessment of whistleblowing, Lansley will always be flogging a dead duck.

[ For all those who have asked me - No, I have no intention of contributing to the consultation. The reason for this is because Lansley ignored my last set of suggestions. There is no reason I should waste my time on a government that does not listen and one who continues to mislead the public]

Andrew Marr's Father in Law

2010-10-12T10:48:00.000-07:00

Andrew Marr's Father in Law in Action.

I quite like Andy - that was until I got two phonecalls informing me that I was apparently like this

"A lot of bloggers seem to be socially inadequate, pimpled, single, slightly seedy, bald, cauliflower-nosed, young men sitting in their mother's basements and ranting. They are very angry people"

Andy has now alienated the entire population of bloggers and it is quite easy for us citizen journalists to fill the internet with negative material about him. We shouldn't talk about Andy's skinny frame, his receding hairline, his large nose and his ability to do his bit to protect a failing profession. It is of course time that the mainstream media understood that citizen journalists are here to stay. We are often more astute and more intelligent about many aspects of the subject we intend on covering. We might not be as eloquent with the words but this is the land of free speech. If we asked Andrew Marr about Ward 87 - he wouldn't have a clue. Neither would he understand what the salient features were. Me thinks Andrew is feeling insecure about his own status and that of his journalist colleagues. We won't mention the fact that some of the BBC journalists/and others steal our material and don't credit our blogs. Yes, we have logs too and know exactly who is reading, cutting and pasting and what articles end up in the mainstream media. Perhaps the public are just fed up of being given the usual streamlined rubbish. May be they don't like being talked down to and spoon fed anymore. In addition, mainstream journalists just don't make good bloggers - you have to be a certain type of rebel. And Andrew Marr himself just doesn't cut it on the blogging dance floor.

Andy was once a member of the Socialist Campaign for Labour Victory. It is interesting that his views on bloggers are identical to that of Tony Blair and Hazel Blears.

Marr is married to the daughter of Lord Ashley of Stoke. That is quite interesting because I once received a letter from Lord Asley of Stoke who couldn't give a flying "F" about Ward 87. Indeed, he told me that he was too ill to deal with that kind of thing. A week or two later, he was spotted by me asking questions at the House of Lords. I have a lot of Labour peers telling me that they are "ill". I wonder why.Indeed Lord Morris of Manchester historically told me he was ill. Illness is quite common at the House of Lords then. Of course, if Andrew Marr had not opened his bald brain and spewed so much clap trap, we wouldn't be scrutinising his father in law's letter on Ward 87.

Anyway, having said he was ill in November 2008, Lord Ashley can be spotted on the 12th November 2008. Then he appears again on the 24th November 2008 and then on the 25th November 2008 he was in fine fettle. Here he is all the way to 2010. Of course, the man from the BBC who visited this blog on his iphone yesterday would have missed this entry. I just thought it was important to add this part of Lord Ashley's "ill health". Yes, I have had alerts set up for" Lord Ashley" from the internet for 2 years now :). I was just interested in the health and welfare of the House of Lord as Lord Darzi performed CPR there sometime ago. Apparently, the place even has a defib. Perhaps Lord Darzi could tend to Lord Ashley's "illness" that precludes him from dealing with Ward 87 [ on his patch]. Perhaps the diagnosis is hypersensitivity type 1 to whistleblowers.

I wonder what would happen if I asked Lord Ashley of Stoke for a "sick note" from his GP.

The Mafia

2010-10-10T06:57:00.000-07:00

Family is important. If we look at the Mafia, we find that they know what brotherhood is all about. They may on occasion be on the wrong side of the law but they are often on the right side of supporting their friends. The problem I find is this - in the UK, who in the realms of bureaucracy is on the right side of the law? Laws are broken every day and few pay much attention.

There is therefore something charming about the mafia - they know what family means, they accept each other and they fight for each other. In 2007, the Ten Commandments of the Mafia were found. My two favourite actors are Marlon Brando and Al Pacino. I was brought up on movies like Scarface and The Godfather. Th Mafia has been made a legend by Hollywood. Apart from their reputation, their existence and survival is down to their allegiance to each other.

There is something admirable about the manner in which the Mafia protect one other, take care of each other and will always be there for their brother. It is much like family. Compared to the UK's medical profession, the Mafia probably has more integrity about it. I say this with a great deal of respect for the utter selfishness that exists within the profession today. Most would see their colleagues deteriorate and die and not lift a finger.

The lack of cohesiveness and support for their whistleblower is evident especially if that person is not quite "like them". By "them" you have to have the status, the kudos and the style. Times have changed a little because Kim Holt managed to garner some king size support for her campaign. Not that she will get anywhere with the campaign or the litigation but at least she is trying and at least people are supporting her. So perhaps aspects of the medical profession is slowly changing. Perhaps things have moved a step forward in that support can be garnered once the whistleblower is in the public eye.

Then I believe that most of the support for Kim is largely due to the maximum publicity and I suspect everyone wants a piece of the cake. Few whistleblowers command any level of support. The same appears to have happened with numerous whistleblowers who are not high profile. By comparison, Margaret Haywood inspired legions of nurses, doctors and the public - yet she did not whistleblow in the same circumstances as others who raise concerns. The media can play a large role in gathering cosmetic support.

So, the distinct lack of support [which is the reality of the situation] is telling of our times. On one hand, the BMJ and its associated publications crows about improvement in the system. In private, they would never associate or fraternise with a whistleblower, never mind sit on the same table as them. Pariah is the buzz word and mud sticks.

All the whistleblowers I have spoken to have at some point in their lives faced professional isolation. For those who are naturally socialites, it bothers them a whole lot. Indeed, this aspect can be crippling to them on occasion. I am not sure why professional isolation didn't quite bother me, possibly because my friends are all from the arts. They tend to be more human and supportive than those in medicine. I was trying to explain to a friend that artists tend to look at the world differently and more humanely. In general, they are also more generous with their time. A doctor doesn't have time for anyone. He or she will always imply that they are the busiest one of them all. A person working in the arts will always make time for important things. I have studied this comparison for many many many years. I often find that this is the reason why many doctors who fall out of line, or off the steps of medical evolution tends to find themselves a little lost. They have little in the way of support from their colleagues - probably because they are all too busy fluffing their egos to similar doctors. If anyone has ever been to a party of doctors - it is often a bit like watching a selection of peacocks showing off.

If you want undying friendship and loyalty, join the mafia. If you want seclusion and animosity during difficult times, become a doctor :). I should though add that you can find many many fair weather friends in medicine. I don't believe that real friendship exists in medicine at all. Medics are too vacant and self centred for that. Quite a lot of relationships are based on opportunism, symbiosis and money. I may of course be wrong :).

The Whistleblowing Stages. Dr Whistleblower is "Mad" "Bad" then "Sad". We won't say she is "right"

2010-10-09T05:09:00.000-07:00

One of the biggest problems with whistleblowing is the fact that the first person caught in the net is the one that will be blamed. Raising concerns about patient care is not a simple issue. The NHS is not thankful for it and neither does it even want to correct their problems. They often see the whistleblower as the person who raised as the one who has to be blamed for everything. This has happened to me on more than one occasion. In Stoke On Trent, North Staffordshire NHS Trust tried to deviate attentions from their mismanagement of the ward by accusing me of something I had never done. You then attempt to sort this out and when you do, the organisational response from the Department of Health and the General Medical Council is rather the same. In my case, I suppose the GMC have for years tried to establish that I am somehow a bad doctor. They have had this bee stuck in their bonnet and no matter how many times they have tried to frisk me, its not worked. Its not worked because I am potentially far far more advanced in my thinking patterns than they are. This is sheer arrogance but it is potentially self confidence. I have got out of the GMC's clutches on three occasions. This is not an easy task. I understand full well that the establishment works through the GMC and it is for that reason, the aim was to sink me so I would never recover from it. North Staffordshire NHS Trust and the General Medical Council have not done well out of harassing me with their pointless investigations that went nowhere. The key to anyone who is exposed to these tactics by the establishment is to understand the undercurrent behind the paperwork you have. Psychological analysis of your opponents is vital. There is no point playing the game if you don't understand the rules.

I suppose, they assumed that like every single junior doctor I would quieten down like a little mouse and say nothing. Of course, I am not one to back down to oppression. So yes, its all about having the fighting spirit and learning to accept that you have to fight for what you believe to be right. I think if we all do that with a honest conscience, nothing can touch us. So, first they say you are mad, then they say you are bad then they start to say you are just sad. I have been through two phases and I am going through the third phase so hopefully the myths about me will soon be dispelled. Peter Wilmshurst once told me that it takes about ten years to be taken seriously despite the fact that multiple pieces of evidence stare everyone in the face.

For those of you who find the onslaught difficult, you have to always remember that it is just a phase for you to work through and survive. At the end of it, if you are right, you often sit on the top of the mountain ten years later in the gleeful satisfaction that you were right all along. At that point, all those who have harassed you, undermined you, called you names - just seem irrelevant guttersnipe human beings who you then start to pity. I suppose I often look down on a number of people in the higher echelons of power. I believe that respect has to be earned not demanded.

That is probably what in the end is called an element of justice. In whistleblower land, it is called vindication and we all aim for it. I am nearly there with it and in my view its taken a long long time. Nevertheless, this is a element that was very important to me on a personal level. And yes, even if it took ten years of hard work, it serves to show the public that the system fails to work even for those who are right about their concerns.

Buffallo Milk and Little India

2010-10-08T08:42:00.000-07:00

Once a week, I normally make my way down to Little India. This maybe Southall, Birmingham or Leicester. That is the fantastic thing about being a hybrid Indian. I can and do merge into the crowd. I normally wander around the shops looking at the sparkling things. That is the great thing about Little India, everything sparkles and everything is probably gold. Most Indians try and buy a Mercedes Benz and send their kids to private school. I think my own family did things upside down. In the old days, everyone used to test out how many heads fitted into to a Datsun Sunny. You could tell it was an Asian car by the number of heads. These days, you can tell its a Asian car by the fact that you can't see the driver of the Mercedes Benz. It is normally a short Indian lady trying her best to peer across the steering wheel. This is why I walk on foot when I reach Little India. Its safer that way.

One of my pleasures in life in the UK is Channel Island Milk. Bar chocolate, I have no specific vices. I do though love milk.

In Little India, there is a delicacy where Indian sweets [ Mittai] is made with Buffalo Milk. It is the most delicious rich delicacy to hit your taste buds since Haagen Daaz ice-cream. The trick is to tell yourself that for each two pieces you eat, you must ride the exercise bike for 20 minutes. I can of course cope with that. So, it is important to indulge in such things. Before that, I normally make my way to a very small Indian eatery where the plates are cheap but the food is much like being in heaven. For £2.50, I normally munch through a vegetable biriyani while my friends scoff the parathas. So, yes, time off is always important. I love visiting Little India because there are so many things to see, do and eat. For me it is always like walking from a black and white film into a land of colour. While, I am not a sari wearer, neither do I deck myself in gold or own a Mercedes Benz, I think Indian culture has a lot to offer everyone.

Why prattle on?

2010-10-07T11:27:00.000-07:00

One of the most common questions asked of me is this - why do I still talk about Ward 87? Is it because; like many whistleblowers, I can't let go? Is it because, I have a vendetta against the NHS? Is it because, I have nothing better to do? Well, it's none of those reasons. The main reason for prattling on about Ward 87 is to demonstrate to members of the public that the NHS is currently unaccountable. As it is unaccountable, it is dropping patients like flies and not learning any lessons from its mistakes.

It is also vital to demonstrate that as a whistleblower, you can be right but no one thanks you for sticking your neck out on the chopping board for it to be - errr - chopped off! I was a reluctant and unintended whistleblower. Placed in a situation where there was no other option - I took the only path that was the right one. It was one of those emergency situations and I made the call to save patients. What should have ended with an improvement in the health system escalated into a national controversy.

In the last 10 years, and it has been 10 years - I have found that the only person concerned about the accountability of the hazardous conditions on the Ward was me. My consultants couldn't give a flying F. The man responsible for the fiasco is currently working at a Private Hospital, remains untouchable and is probably engaging in a round of golf. The Chief Executive is minting far more money now than he was entitled to. The patients of course are 6 foot under and the relatives have been kept in the dark about what happened to their loved ones. The GMC of course have better things to do like develop their obsessional compulsive chasing Rita disorder. The CQC is quite mad and the Department of Health just wants to forget I even existed.

Of course, I do exist and I don't plan on dying unless a large meteor falls down on me tomorrow. So what I want to know is this - where is the accountability that all these organisations crow about. I know it is very easy for the Department of Health to brush this issue aside and say " Ah, that was in 1998 and this is now, we have changed". I am still waiting for accountability and it has not come. The conclusion here is this - does the Department of Health expect every whistleblower to tolerate what I have been subjected to. If that is so, then I doubt anyone will raise their head above the parapet. Anyhow, I have all the time in the world to sit wait and watch -I would like to see how many years it takes for accountability to be achieved. It is vital not to misunderstand me, I have indeed moved on with many parts of my life - the past is of course part of me and I am simply curious as to why the establishment believes that I will be stupid enough to accept the pitiful trickles of bird food they have thrown in my direction. So after some remote accountability, I can stop talking about Ward 87.

Personality

2010-10-04T02:42:00.000-07:00

Rustom and Preetha on Vocals. Rita in Purple on Piano.

For those of us into astronomy and space, we tend to understand the finite nature of the world around us. Yes, when I look up at the sky I always think of the fact that a meteor may just fall on me and it would be the end. I also think about how large the universe is and how minor the issue on North Staffordshire NHS Trust really was. I began to think like that in about 1998. I think its the only way I survived through it. Over the years though I have never forgotten or forgiven those who sought out to malevolently shoot me. There is a place in Stoke on Trent - it is up in the hills. From there you can see the stars and the entire lights of the city. During the times of turmoil, I spent large amounts of time there fixing my mind on how to deal with standing on my own. Before North Staffs, I had depended on friends, members of my family and many people. I was potentially a large social cat with legions of acquaintances and friends to speak of. My personality was largely different. I was probably more tolerant, was more likely to waste time on pointless and aimless chit chat and tended not to value life in general.

If you examine a person's psyche, you are essentially what the environment makes you. The environment around you is always a rough terrain in many ways. The decision on how to survive this rests solely on you. This is the case with whistleblowers. Their personality adapts to their environment and there are bound to be some changes. In my case, I was a seriously pissed off bunny 2 years after I raised concerns. This was reflected in my writing and my manner of not really giving a damn about irrelevant people. Being pissed off is of course not a mental illness. This is the biggest mistake made by the General Medical Council really. Then I had the last laugh there. I think authorities cannot expect whistleblowers to remain calm and collected when shit is thrown at them from a great height. This experience is bound to change people in general.

Nevertheless, there is this huge expectation by Trusts, authorities, members of the public and the medical profession, that whistleblowers have to remain calm and collected despite having their entire livelihood shot to flinders in front of them. For me, I am probably a little more selective in who I associate with. I tend to have a zero tolerance policy for bastards which is probably why I am far more assertive than I used to be. In time, you learn to develop a good shell much like a turtle so few people can penetrate or discover who the real you is. This is of course useful when fighting the authorities. When raising concerns, each authority is generally going to treat you as if you are the scum of the earth. This is because whistleblowers are generally perceived as the scum of the earth.

I cannot deny that whistleblowers don't have mental health problems. This group is probably at a high risk of developing mental health problems. In the end, it is up to the whistleblower whether he or she allows themselves to sink into this particular quagmire. Personally, I think it is a waste of time to wallow in self pity or self destructive behaviour. I cannot deny I have not had low periods in my life, of course I have. My way of dealing with these periods is to understand that they will soon disappear. I tend to stop anything that stresses me. I tend to start watching DVDs, playing music, walking outside and I do take Omega 3. It is about the only thing I do take. Different people have different coping strategies but the most vital aspect of learning about yourself is - knowing what your limitations are and learning to develop methods of dealing with periods that are less than optimal. In psychiatry, there are a number of mood triggers. These may include circumstances or people who lower your mood. For me, I just stop associating with anything that irritates me. I am quite lucky because I migrate to the solitude of my piano during times when I cannot see a solution. The other method to use is to start your housework. I really hate saying this but housework is actually quite good for many mood dysfunctions during a day or the week or even longer.

Nature is also an excellent way to try and forget the past. For me, forests, plants and flowers are utterly fascinating. It normally takes me back to plant biology when I did my A Levels. Nevertheless, its just wonderful to understand where you fit within nature. In my view, these small things done during the week are probably likely to benefit anyone. My view of the world today is that it is too technological, people have forgotten how to be human and in the end there are many toxic elements around. The expectations of society is one toxic factor to anyone's mental state. Peer pressure is not only a medical phenomena but really something that exists in society to pull us all down to some kind of ground state level. Alcoholism or any kind of addiction is something whistleblowers may indeed be prone to. Medicating your pain is probably what it is called. Alcohol though is a serious depressant and if you need your brain to function but it is sedated - of course you aren't going to be able to think rationally or consider matters logically. My only experience of addiction is chocolate. It was a severe addiction with multiple side effects :). I suspect Thorntons can be blamed for medicating my pain. And its done well really because it saved me from any type of addictions to more harmful substances. I know it got to the point where I just could not function in the morning without at least one shot of Thorntons. Sad but true. At that point, it was time to detox myself ! Since 2007, my chocolate eating ways have become normal - to about once a month. This has helped my bank balance, my weight and my teeth. I can even walk past Thorntons without purchasing a bag of truffles for the next GMC letter I have to formulate. The other notable problem appears to have affected my limbic system. I am not sure why but pre 1998 I was never really into observing the horizon of devilishly handsome men. Since 1998, the entire thing has gone out of control. I have noticed that it worsens during periods when I have to write a GMC letter or material on whistleblowing. I haven't quite figured out that phenomena. In court, I think the misery gets to me the most and I default into this "Lets spot the devilishly handsome barrister". I am not quite sure what I would do if I caught one of these handsome men - probably lock them up in hamster cage and watch them on the wheel no doubt. So yes, even I have to have my distractions and my fix in some way or form. So, for the vast majority of the time, all is well until I am faced with dealing with authority, the GMC or some miserable idiot - after that, I can only try and look at the best in a situation. Normally, that just defaults to good looking men wherever I am. And boy, is the world full of good looking men or what? So while the chocolate intake has improved, I am not quite clear how to get rid of my collection of devilishly handsome men. Someone suggested a blindfold. Ummmm..................... perhaps I just have permanent dysfunction of the limbic system caused by Ward 87. Damn!

Shooting whistleblowers on sight. Is it a crime to be a Whistleblower?

2010-10-02T15:29:00.000-07:00

Over the years, [ ten years in medicine in my case], I have demonstrated the various instances of doctors and NHS managers believing they have a right to shoot whistleblowers on sight. Of course, in the NHS, no one needs a gun to kill a person's career. No one needs a gun to kill a whistleblower. The usual hatred of whistleblowers is self evident through the behaviour of many doctors. Many feel it is somehow their duty to the state to rid the world of whistleblowers. These notes by me are made online because it is important to play out some tales in full public view. I am not impressed with the rosey view created by the coalition government. I am not impressed by the media's view of whistleblowers. I think they like keeping us all in a "Victim" cage. Poor us, whistleblowers who have no lives, who are obsessed with their cases and who should be pitied. Of course, I view whistleblowers a little differently. They are all highly intelligent individuals, trying to make their way in the world. And if the world of medicine would give them one fucking break - it may well make them more human rather than superhuman.

I have demonstrated my own experience first with Doctors.net.uk, many of its users felt obliged to refer me to the GMC because they felt that my material was controversial. The problem with playing with me is that I am not one to pity people. As soon as the GMC threatened to unmask the doctors, the complaints were dropped. That was then. These days anonymous complaints are taken up and welcomed by the GMC [ as demonstrated by the Sarah Myhill case].

Following that, Sheila Mann, the old hag straight from the Royal College of Psychiatrists advised as screener to the GMC. She was so desperate to find some element of madness that her high water mark ended up flat on its face. She admitted that a "typographical error" was the high water mark of my apparent madness. Yes, the entire court was silent in disbelief until the audience tittered.

Of course, it was too late by then because the mindset of the GMC was already well developed. They decided they were going to undermine me, throw out all my complaints to discredit me and following on from that, they were going to somehow establish that they were always right. In ten years, each piece of evidence has proven them wrong. They remain speechless and impotent. The GMC has no answers now.

Each and every consultant who subsequently found out about my past, shut down on me. We can name legions of them. Most simply did the wisest thing and kept their mouth zipped up.

Others were led by some kind of compulsion to destroy my earning potential and my livelihood. I have already described Dr Anders Skarsten and his 7 panel mates who decided to support a criminal rather than a whistleblower. Anders was such a slimeball - before he knew I was a whistleblower, he would ring me up in the dead of night complimenting me and fawning all over my work, like some desperate puppy. He sent me flowers on my birthday etc. Yes, we all knew why he did all this. It wasn't kindness but then I knew about empty men and desperate male doctors and normally smiled, nodded and walked away. Evolution has never been kind to the development of their mind, emotions and the contents of their trousers. Everything remained tiny apart from their wallet. In those days, I had my own platinum American express so wallets just didn't interest me.

It all changed of course as soon as he found out about my whistleblowing ways. It is amazing how fast the wind does change. I have these fantasies of standing in the middle of an NHS hospital and screaming " I am an NHS Whistleblower, Get Me Out of Here" :). I often wonder what the reaction would be. It would be just like Skarsten's reaction. At least there were no midnight phonecalls from drunk consultants telling you how wonderful you are. If there was a fly on my wall, it would have observed that I left the phone by the bed while filing my nails and occasionally returned to it and said words like " I agree, absolutely, definitely, you are right". How does one deal with a drunk consultant oncall? I didn't complain, I just hoped it would eventually disappear.

One of Skarsten's SHOs complained of sexual harassment but the team of shrinks in Northamptonshire did very well to conceal it. Consultants have a excellent manner in which this is done covertly. No junior actually stands a chance in a complaint like that.

He claimed to be depressed at his Employment Tribunal while having detailed phone sex with a girl I knew very well. Perhaps that was just temporary "severe" depression. His 5 year warning at the GMC was given due to an element of pity. The GMC pities people like him. We note that despite his admissions of depression, Dr Sheila Mann, the old hag did not discreetly inquiry into his life or his past. It was a different kettle of fish when it came to me. I have no idea what gives people like her the right to sneak around in my life then admit it in the GMC memos. Her admission of a discreet inquiry is actually historical. Just goes to show the creepy and low levels people employed by the GMC can stoop to.

Lastly, we have Worcestershire Mental Health Trust who jumped straight into bed with the General Medical Council and decided to join in the party of lying. They deceived the court together after they discovered I was a whistleblower. Deception is common. The GMC engages in it all the time. When people like me expose it, we are called obsessional or disaffected. Worcestershire Mental Health Trust developed a compulsion to shoot me. They had the option of keeping their large nosey snout out of my court challenge with the GMC. Instead, they decided to rub baby oil all over the GMC's body. The GMC was indeed all loved up and for a while it didn't act like a spurned lover.

When I was cleared, Worcestershire Mental Health Trust and its half crazed management had nothing to say. Having fraternised with the GMC and joined them in sessions of lust, they found themselves in a huge predicament when the very court case they had created was used against them. The two doctors found themselves at the mercy of the General Medical Council. Lying has consequences especially when some of us are fairly good at keeping our eyes open. It is a fantastic irony that the very case law they had been involved in creating was used as an instrument of their downfall. The Medical Director behaved like a rat on a sinking ship. He left his job as MD, has resident GMC hotshot panellist, as examiner and became a "jobbing doctor". Of course, all this would never have happened if they had kept their large snout away from their usual compulsion of shooting the whistleblower.

So in summary, I believe whistleblowers should have a zero tolerance policy. In my view, those who have tried to harm me in any way have had the same issues reversed back on them. This is not done out of revenge but more out of a principle I believe in. I have carried out an experiment to combat medical mobbing. This kind of high risk tactical manoeuvre cannot be carried out unless you know how to control the situation. It is potentially the only way I lasted in the NHS for 10 years. As a junior doctor, the half life of a whistleblower is dire. I don't believe any junior doctor should ever whistleblow due to these kinds of repercussions. The medical fraternity is close knit and news flies fast. Most doctors believe that whistleblowers should be destroyed and they take great satisfaction in instigating a situation where your livelihood is crippled. The depth of intellectual corruption and wickedness towards whistleblowers is not understood by many members of the public. There has been no change in culture especially in the UK. I doubt there will be much change although the current campaign by Remedy UK brings a ray of hope.

The above are examples of doctors I have come across. The pattern is largely the same for many whistleblowers. Combating mobbing very early on is extremely important because lack of action is a surefire way to creating a situation of no return. All whistleblowers need to think tactically and psychologically as opposed to being crippled in the victim mode. It is very easy to be crippled by fear of fear itself. The art is to take yourself out of the situation and work out a plan of action that will indeed be of advantage to you. Unfortunately, as demonstrated on this website, my plans tend bear fruit after many many years. That is the nature of the system - it is slow, it is laborious and it takes hard work. The reason it is done by me is to demonstrate the poor quality of the system we exist in.

For me, the result is this - I don't recognise the authority of the GMC because it has effectively failed me. I don't have any respect for the medical fraternity because it has been instrumental in attempting to assassinate my livelihood. I don't have very much respect for authority because it has not assisted in this devastating situation. Therefore, despite being an established evidence based whistleblower, no one had any solutions to the repercussions of whistleblowing - so I developed my own solutions the hard way. I look back at the above, and life was meant to be simpler - yet, it became so complex.

Preferring Criminals to Whistleblowers

2010-09-29T15:47:00.000-07:00

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

Roll up, Roll Up. Calling All Whistleblowers

2010-09-22T01:18:00.000-07:00

Stop mooing - start making a difference. Contact Remedy UK

So we note that few whistleblowers are prepared to showcase their specific experiences. So who is going to be the superhero? Well, everyone trusts the BMA but fail to understand that the BMA are wholly responsible for most of the shut down behaviour conducted by Trusts, the GMC etc etc. El Gov have been playing the same broken record for numerous years.

Since Sandy Macara was outed as freemason of the year and trouser leg supermo, we can safely assume that the British Medical Association are filled with clubby chummy networked trouser leg supremos. We know this from the research done by numerous people who have attended these various chummy clubby meetings. The BMA is the establishment and they are part of the problem - when it comes to whistleblowers.The establishment's modus operandi is to silence whistleblowers and all doctors who "step out of line".

What beats me is this, every single whistleblower sits and blows their whistle, gets shafted then starts to fear, fear itself. It is an established fact that no single case whistleblower can change the system on their own. I therefore have no idea what the reluctance of going to Remedy UK is all about. This is why nothing gets done- each whistleblower sits around mooing like a large Friesian cow failing to even understand the wider concept of playing a part in changing the system. One of the post whistleblowing traits is the fact that many pontificate intellectually then essentially get nowhere as they become unable to make positive decisions. Well, approaching Remedy UK is a positive decision. I wish I had a Remedy UK when I was a junior doctor then I wouldn't have had copious amounts of rubbish thrown at me by the establishment.

In the year 2000/2001 there was a BMA Conference on Whistleblowers. Numerous doctors stood up and accused the panel of failing to support whistleblowers. So, if that can be done at BMA Towers, why can't their cases be presented to Remedy UK? Seriously, there are no superheroes in the world - MPs are complete failures, the BMA has vested interests and will sell out their whistleblowers at the drop of a hat. So who is left? I would view the Remedy UK campaign as the last opportunity for any organisation to make a difference.

In my view [ and this is the view of 10 years experience in this specific whistleblowing cesspit], if you as a whistleblower miss the boat on the Whistleblowing campaign and fail to do your bit to improve the situation then quite frankly no whistleblower has a right to moan about the way they have been treated. I do wish that many whistleblowers would stop being selfish gyroscopic creatures and start looking at the situation as a whole. Together, we can make a difference. It is just a question of understanding that.

So do it today, make a difference and raise your case with Remedy UK. They need cases to make a difference and to understand the manner in which the system should be improved. Without your cases, they won't be an improvement. It is as simple as that. If there is no improvement, we will have to listen to El Gov's broken Cliff Richard again and again.

Calling all whistleblowers - Remedy UK Needs You

2010-09-21T01:29:00.000-07:00

Hunky Matt Shaw to your rescue

Remedy UK, the UK's premier rebel campaign group has set up a laudable campaign to raise the plight of whistleblowers. I am not sure we are all into kinky gagging games as the website illustration implies but nevertheless, I think it is about time Remedy UK took over this vital campaign. Remedy UK apparently needs whistleblower cases. Those who wish to sail with Remedy UK can contact them here.

I am not really fond of the Public Interest Disclosure Act. In my own specific problem which was " being hunted down by the GMC", PIDA was not applicable. I think there is a big difference between whistleblowing and actually being forced to litigate. Firstly, before whistleblowing, consider joining a trade union that is not the British Medical Association. When I needed representation, the BMA was representing the consultants who caused the problem in the first place. Without a supportive trade union, the going is really really tough. The proposed remedy by the El Gov is this - you blow the whistle, get shafted, lose your livelihood and then sue for something pitiful that doesn't actually have any impact on your life after being killed off by your employers.

In this day and age, whistleblowing is not advisable. I told Richard "Dishpot" Marks that most whistleblowers are like frightened little rabbits in a hutch and feeding them lettuce just doesn't make them better. If you are going to blow the whistle, there is no point cowering after the event. That is part of the problem with doctors, they do something for the great and good of humanity then they spontaneously combust when the going gets tough. Of course, the going gets tough when you whistleblow and unless you have your wits about you, you end up in quick sand. The only solution to medical mobbing or sham peer review is to mount a robust defence. I think some of the tactical defences I have constructed have been complex. My aim though was to extract the evidence to prove my position as a whistleblower. I think evidence harvesting is probably the most difficult task of all. Its done by making Data Protection Act and Freedom of Information Act requests. For some whistleblowers, even making these simple requests becomes a difficult decision. Remedy UK will no doubt meet various personalities who are whistleblowers. Anyhow, for those who need a superhero, Remedy UK is probably the best and most trustworthy organisation to deal with the cases. Everyone else can be a superhero all on their own. I appreciate the need for superheroes because some whistleblowers raise concerns but just haven't got the mental or physical stamina to see it through. This is why it its vital for Remedy UK to fly the flag for those with relatively silent voices and whose cases are vital in the appraisal of whistleblowing [ as dealt with by the United Kingdom].

I hope Remedy UK send their findings/data to the European Commissioner of Human Rights. I think the UK should be held to account for their failure to put policies in place to protect whistleblowers.

Pope Mania

2010-09-19T17:12:00.000-07:00

I woke up this morning unable to watch any decent bit of news on British Television so I had to resort to CNN. Pope mania has clearly hit England and I am not the least bit excited. The churches are attempting to do what the government does - build a nice surface thereby hiding the disgraceful child abuse the church was responsible for. For the crimes committed against humanity, any other organisation would be disbanded. Anyhow, now we see that more people pay attention to the Pope than the deaths and neglect in the National Health Service. I recall a tale about the Vatican. A friend of mine sought sanctuary for a elderly lady trapped in the UK. The Vatican informed him that they did not allow women. How is that equal treatment?

As for God, I have a open mind about such things. I really don't want to end up dead and discovering that God had clipped my wings for being a disbeliever. I keep it neutral. I honestly do not think that God would appreciate religion and I am not quite sure why we have religion in the first place. A Bengali holy man -Ram Krishna once said, all religions lead to one God, so why not just believe in God. The issue about religion is that everyone but the worshipper makes money from it. Even the Bible is a manufactured book with lost chapters that has been edited for various agendas. Media relations is not a new concept. Religion has historically protected the uncomfortable secrets and the truth. It has delivered what it sees fit. It is usually a finely watered down version of reality.

I am not quite sure why the world is excited by the Pope, perhaps it is because so many people believe in religions and want to believe that the Pope has some special connection to the Big "G" guy. Perhaps it is merely a product of the kind of insecure and unhappy society we have today.

Swept Under the Carpet

2010-09-18T12:48:00.000-07:00

Over the years, I have observed many behaviour patterns exhibited by the establishment. One of the most important notes to make here is the establishment's art of ensuring that no one is held accountable for misdemeanors or harm caused to individuals. One of the General Medical Council's favourite way is to say " That was in the past, we have improved and we are now in the present". By doing this, the GMC circumvents all the problems of the past. They do not examine the problems nor do they address how matters could improve. This specific pattern can be observed with establishment trade unions like the British Medical Association. The British Medical Association have historically failed legions of doctors. They only reason they are left standing is because no one can be bothered to sue them. Unknown to most people, before Irwin Mitchell took over their legal work, their internal solicitors were found guilty by the then Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal. The BMA's failures are legendary. Nevertheless, the BMA and its numerous Chairmen over the years have insisted that that was then and this is now.

Promises are repeatedly made in many meetings or inquiries. These promises are never kept. The Bristol Inquiry was one such place where numerous promises were made to whistleblower kind. Sadly, none of these promises were ever kept.

It has taken me numerous years to prove that I was right. Days and nights of working hard on FOIA and DPA requests, extracting data, making complaints with a view to extracting data etc. When the evidence is finally there, the above establishments will say - ah well, that was in the past. Indeed, this was the response from Public Concern at Work. The problem was, no one looked back and said " what can we learn from this"? If they had done, Mid Staffordshire fiasco would never have happened. This is one of the problems with the United Kingdom. The authorities have a strange idea of accountability. Perhaps historically, that was the British way of doing this - hide the disasters under the carpet and move on thereby pretending it never ever happened.

When we all look at the British system, it is fragmented, shattered and filled with incompetent bureaucrats who cannot address basic issues. Their incompetence is subsequently reflected on the whistleblower - a bit like transference - they cannot blame themselves so they blame and discredit the messenger. Of course, I would never wish anyone to down the road, I have been down. It is not for the fainthearted or those who are afraid of fear itself. One of the main problems with whistleblowers is that they have this idealistic vision of doing something for the "public good" and few understand or even bother to read about the repercussions. Having thrown themselves in the pit with all the vipers, most then expect the world to save them. Of course, there aren't any superheroes in the world, as a whistleblower - you only have your own wits to rely upon. For some situations, that isn't enough.

Dishpot Richard Marks told me today that the authorities discredit whistleblowers by saying they are mad and the system can drive them mad. Perhaps that is so. Perhaps whistleblowers really do suffer from fragmented personality. Stress does interesting things to many people's mental state. For me, I suppose, the impact was "not to take no for a answer" and to be even more determined to continue forward. I am perhaps a little rattier than I would normally have been. Overall though I have learned to enjoy living and life a little more.

I have no doubts that the system may well drive whistleblowers to the end of the cliff. The trick is not to allow the system to drive you there. I am not perfect by any means but one part of winning against the system is to keep going no matter what. This is really a mindset. The power of the mind is an amazing thing. Just because the system is dysfunctional and inadequate does not mean whistleblowers should pay a high price. That is the way I look at the system around me anyway.

Fascinating Captain GMC

2010-09-17T12:01:00.000-07:00

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 :).

Starry Eyed

2010-09-15T11:13:00.000-07:00

The problem with many teenies going off to Uni is the fact that they all think they know "everything". I have found this with Hobbits and I tend to just remain silent while they all talk about themselves and their aspirations. I asked one whether it had reflected on its choice in medicine. I advised " You should read around medicopolitics, the fact that many F1s are leaving the UK, the fact that assessments are killing most doctors etc". The response was a blatant shut down. One perks up " Just because your experience was bad, doesn't mean ours will be". Of course, that is true. What is also true is that few doctors are staying in UK medicine. There must be a reason for that. I know the medical fraternity are working on degrees like the EMDP [at Kings] to develop doctors who are "grateful to the establishment for pulling them out of poverty". This no doubt will create a workforce that is grateful and one that does not challenge the status quo or indeed think about it. I have found that the analytical ability of teenagers today is considerably poorer than it used to be. Most are starry eyed, never listen to older people and will do whatever they feel is right without researching or considering the fact that medicine may or may not be the correct career choice.

For me medicine was a career choice because I was bright, determined and probably would have been successful in anything I put my mind to. My motivation as to help people. I know some of my colleagues are largely motivated by the kudos that medicine brings. There is no doubt a huge amount of kudos but I have often found that tiring in many ways. This is potentially why, I walk around the earth without sporting my "Dr" title too often. It just annoys me that people get so starry eyed about the title. I often think for most teenagers, the glamour of medicine is what attracts them to the career. They then spend the rest of their lives in medicine living up to the image.

If I had my time again, I would probably do English Literature at University. A much more laudable and human subject, more suited to my nature and I probably would have had far more decent friends who were more developed in their ability to be "human". That is probably my biggest regret. I find many people in medicine to be two dimensional, egotistical, largely indecisive and driven by the decadence of society. When I attend parties with doctors, all they tend to talk about is themselves.

Had someone told me that as a teenager, I would never have entered medicine. It is probably quite important to consider your personality and ask yourself " what do I want out of life" then progressing to make an assessment of whether medicine or any other career suits you. This is probably a better way to decide upon a career path.

Lastly, I think 18 is far too early to decide whether medicine is the right thing. I am all for students taking a year out, orientating themselves with the world, the opposite sex and being independent. Decisions made at 18 may become bad ones at the age of 30. Mature students probably have more of an idea about who they are in the world. Perhaps they even make better doctors. At least during my time teaching medical students, I felt that the mature students were better equipped while the younger ones remained starry eyed and hell bent on telling everyone they are in medicine and they got AAA. Perhaps this may well be an ageist comment but it is only an observation of teenager kind.

Social Mobility

2010-09-09T04:29:00.000-07:00

Yesterday, I featured a You Tube video about Virginia Jibowu. The most interesting aspect of this case is that the EMDP programme at Kings College London is the brain child of Mr Common Purpose himself Cyril Chantler. Cyril and his friends think that poor kids like to be given entrance into medical school through a special programme where the entry grades are lowered. In reality, this has caused resentment between the MBBS candidates and the EMDP students. This is understandable. Conflict is expected in any system which segregates.

I dissected the issue of social mobility some time ago. The link is here. This is essentially a New Labour concept. What New Labour has not banked on is the fact that people from poverty stricken areas may not want to be treated like disabled people - given special treatment and treated as lesser human beings. They may just want to have the equal treatment. They may even want to compete in the same pool as every other student.

I think the EMDP should be banned and its funding pulled. There are many ways to encourage a cross sectional socioeconomic class into medicine. The EMDP is not the right way forward.

I think the issue with Virginia is a large neon warning sign. One day the conflict between the EMDP and the MBBS will probably end the life of some poor student.That is the result of the Kings Management failing to take legitimate concerns seriously.

Kings College London. The Social Experiment

2010-09-08T07:00:00.001-07:00

Julie

2010-09-07T08:44:00.000-07:00

My friend Julie.

Julie lost her mother recently. As usual, I am probably the last person to find out about it probably because I am so tunnel visioned about many things.

She writes her post here.

"The past few weeks have been pretty weird. Up until a few weeks ago, I had a solid identity as Mum's carer. The house was like Hotel Central, with a steady procession of district nurses, carers and doctors dropping in and out. I had a limited amount of time in which I could go out and always had to be back for a certain time. Now they have all melted away and I feel like a satellite that has dropped out of orbit. Life has rewound to thirteen years previously, when I had finished my degree and diploma in music and I didn't have a clue where I was going with it. And yet."

I have followed Julie's adventures as a carer for a while. She is and always will be one of the most admirable people I have ever had the pleasure of knowing. She sacrificed much of herself for the sake of caring for her mother. That is always a sign of someone truly special, kind and generous. People like that are rare in this world. We live in a modern society where our elders are usually shoved off to a old people's home so that we can all get on with our lives. I have seen many people as a doctor. I have seen the way,their grown children leave them in residential homes and forget about them when their usefulness comes to an end. I have seen people like this in hospitals and nursing homes who are terribly lonely. As doctors, we always try our best to give them that one friendly smile. Kindness is of course free.

It is though rare these days to see a daughter lovingly take care of her mother as Julie did.

A little known fact to the world around me is my role as a carer from the age of 10. I suppose, I had been embarrassed of identifying myself as one. My father was a disabled man at the age of 52 when encephalitis hit him. My world had turned upside down. Since the age of 10, I have desperately tried to turn my world the right way up. I had spent years concealing who I really was as the word "carer" carried a kind of stigma. No one would understand why I opted to take care of my father. So many doctors kept telling me to place my father in a home but I refused. I made it to medical school despite all the odds being set against me. I quietly did my best and defied all the predictions of what carers should be. I wasn't going to just have an NVQ in care as many carers organisations expect. I was going to do my best without making any excuses whatsoever. I suppose over the years, I have become extremely good at concealing many aspects of my life. Perhaps, I just did not want people to perceive this as a weakness. After all, in the world of medicine, caring for family is an alien concept. Sure, the work system understands "mothers and babies" but the same respect is not given to carers as such.

I had responsibility and few understood what this responsibility meant. When I commenced working as a doctor, I paid for my father's rehabilitation to ensure maximum independence. When Ward 87 happened, the NHS assassinated the support system for my family. When the GMC hunted me down, I prayed everyday just to be able to work for the years my father needed supporting. Despite being a fugitive and working in fear, I managed to support everyone. I think this concept is missed when doctors are essentially assassinated for no reason whatsoever. The NHS is often gleeful in maliciously assassinating good doctors but fails to understand how many members of their family depend on that doctor.

During my time in the NHS, I would complete oncalls, return home to complete further care and sleepless nights. I would say my maximum time of sleep was about 2 hours per week. It is true that I learned to work efficiently and faster than many of my colleagues. I didn't have the comfort zone of being able to make any errors.

During the last six months of his life in 2005, I cannot remember having any sleep at all for weeks on end. When he died, life seemed more difficult than the time he was alive. I am not really sure why. It just happened to be the case. I cared less and less about the GMC and their sniffer hound behaviour. Losing a parent is extremely difficult and traumatic and no other type of loss compares with it. My viewpoint of the world was that everything was largely irrelevant and there was no point being uptight about anything.

I learned many things when I was a carer - I learned to survive better than most people and I learned to survive independently. I have never ever regretted my decision to take care of my father. I did it because I wanted to and because I respected him for all he taught me. There are many education systems in our world. I think my father's was the best.

When people we love die, there is though always light at the end of the tunnel despite the initial shock and devastation. I recently told Julie that death is a transitional phase much like evolution and physics. It is also part of life. Nothing is ever the very end. Sometimes, it is just the beginning.

Concentration down to zero

2010-09-07T07:48:00.000-07:00

All was well today in my world of work until Dr India emailed me. This is the link he sent. I converted Dr India quite a while ago and persuaded him that chocolate was the key to most things in life. After reviewing the link containing the very novel idea of a chocolate pizza, I can't now concentrate.

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

2010-09-04T12:01:00.000-07:00

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 :).

Desiderata

2010-09-02T17:51:00.000-07:00

The poem below was once sent to me by the infamous Beau Eckland. It landed in my email box at a time when I was disenchanted with most things. That year was 2006. Anyhow, during the last few weeks, a number of people in trouble have been in discussion with me. Some of them have felt the depths of despair and others cannot see the light at the end of the tunnel. For all those who have these issues, it should be remembered that we are all in charge of our own destiny. We only have one life and in my view there is little or no point being miserable. The sun still rises in the morning and nothing is as bad as it was yesterday. Someone asked me to day " Do you really wake up happy everyday and if so you have achieved utopia". The answer to that was "Yes, I do" but the journey to achieving that takes a lot of in depth thought. The journey though started with this poem.

Desiderata - by max ehrmann

Go placidly amid the noise and haste, and remember what peace there may be in silence.

As far as possible, without surrender, be on good terms with all persons. Speak your truth quietly and clearly; and listen to others, even to the dull and the ignorant, they too have their story. Avoid loud and aggressive persons, they are vexations to the spirit.

If you compare yourself with others, you may become vain and bitter; for always there will be greater and lesser persons than yourself. Enjoy your achievements as well as your plans. Keep interested in your own career, however humble; it is a real possession in the changing fortunes of time.

Exercise caution in your business affairs, for the world is full of trickery. But let this not blind you to what virtue there is; many persons strive for high ideals, and everywhere life is full of heroism. Be yourself. Especially, do not feign affection. Neither be cynical about love, for in the face of all aridity and disenchantment it is perennial as the grass.

Take kindly to the counsel of the years, gracefully surrendering the things of youth. Nurture strength of spirit to shield you in sudden misfortune. But do not distress yourself with imaginings. Many fears are born of fatigue and loneliness.

Beyond a wholesome discipline, be gentle with yourself. You are a child of the universe, no less than the trees and the stars; you have a right to be here. And whether or not it is clear to you, no doubt the universe is unfolding as it should.

Therefore be at peace with God, whatever you conceive Him to be, and whatever your labors and aspirations, in the noisy confusion of life, keep peace in your soul.

With all its sham, drudgery and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world.

Be cheerful. Strive to be happy.

Max Ehrmann c.1920

Rewarding Whistleblowers. By Phil Hammond

2010-08-30T04:22:00.000-07:00

This was a piece written in Private Eye recently. I hope my fellow bloggers opt to link to it.

Rewarding Whistleblowers

Well done Channel 4 News and the Bureau of Investigative Journalism for their exposure of the widespread use of taxpayers’ money to silence NHS whistleblowers (Ch 4 news, 2.8.10). Many employment contracts still have gagging clauses and most doctors who invoke the Public Interest Disclosure Act (PIDA) to raise concerns about unsafe or fraudulent practice reach a settlement with their employer to prevent concerns being made public. Superficially, this smells of whistleblowers bottling it and taking the money, but when you look at the experience of those who refuse to be silenced, there’s no great incentive to do the right thing.

The NHS’s most famous whistleblower, Dr (now Professor) Stephen Bolsin, was praised in Parliament for raising concerns about standards of child heart surgery in Bristol nearly 20 years ago, and his actions were fully vindicated by a Public Inquiry. Yet he became unemployable in the NHS and relocated to Australia, where he continued his excellent work in monitoring clinical outcomes. Had Bolsin remained in the NHS, it is inconceivable that small units would have been allowed to continue operating and the Oxford heart scandal would have been avoided (Eye last).

If Andrew Lansley is genuine in his desire to support whistleblowers, he should consider formal recognition of Bolsin’s bravery. The Mid Staffs inquiry will doubtless show that staff were either too afraid to blow the whistle, or too easily silenced, despite the many avoidable deaths occurring around them. NHS whistleblowers are vulnerable and isolated, and have few role models. The public recognition of Bolsin’s legacy would go some way to making it acceptable to speak up.

For whistleblowers who want to go the distance, the best chance of being heard is to go to court. In the UK, any payouts tend to be swallowed up by legal expenses and loss of earnings. But in the US, whistleblowers are rewarded handsomely if they help the government bring a successful case. In May, the New England Journal of Medicine followed up 26 successful whistleblowers from the pharmaceutical industry 2. On average each received $3 million for speaking up, with the range going from $100,000 to $42 million. Last September, Pfizer paid $2.3 billion to settle allegations that they illegally marketed a painkiller, Bextra, which has now been withdrawn. A proportion of the settlement was divided between the 6 whistleblowers.

Whistleblowers are rarely motivated by money, and nearly all try to ‘go through the correct channels’ first before going public. And even a large payout is scant consolation for the emotional exhaustion and stress of speaking out. In May, an employment tribunal found that John Watkinson, a former chief executive of the Royal Cornwall NHS Trust, was sacked for blowing the whistle on the failure of the Trust and Strategic Health Authority to consult the public adequately before moving cancer services. An independent review has now agreed that public consultation was inadequate, but the Trust is appealing against the tribunal findings. They accept that Watkinson was unfairly dismissed but challenge that he was a whistleblower, wary off the unlimited damages that are supposed to be awarded to sacked whistleblowers under PIDA. In the meantime, Watkinson remains unemployed – and like Bolsin, probably unemployable in the NHS.

As well as publically recognizing whistleblowers, Lansley needs to place a statutory duty on all NHS employers to report all serious concerns about patient safety or fraud to the Care Quality Commission (CQC) and Monitor for investigation and publication. Gagging clauses, and attempts to buy the silence of public sector workers raising genuine concerns in the public interest, must be outlawed. Whether the CQC and Monitor have the independence, expertise and resources to deal with all the NHS’s dirty secrets remains to be seen, but the practice of damage limitation, either by paying off staff or ordering secret ‘independent’ inquiries that never see the light of day, must end.

1 www.steve-bolsin.com/

2 www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMsr0912039