Dehydrated child, being rehydrated, given drug to lower blood pressure which had been deliberately not prescribed for this admission as child dehydrated, late reporting of lab results, insufficient medical staff etc, non paediatric bank nurse forced to work in paeds. Not simple.
-
-
-
She is a convicted criminal. Today's result does not change that fact, regardless of how many try to conflate the two things. I'm sorry Rae, but on this point, it really is that simple.
-
Simplistic nonsense. Stick the witch in a ducking stool. If she drowns she was innocent. Great. Where was her senior cover? Why was wrong drug given? Why were lab results late? Why were there insufficient juniors? Why was non paeds trained nurse there? Not her fault
#scapegoating -
What nonsense. You want the longer answer? Here it is.https://twitter.com/c7rky/status/1028409578076160000?s=21 …
-
I worked in the NHS from 1979 to 2017. I know exactly how senior managers protect themselves and throw staff to the wolves. Few staff speak up for fear of reprisal (they see what happened to those who do). What you see is not the truth.
-
I know very well that what the NHS shows us publicly is not the truth. Read my letter and you'll see I touch on the subject. Or read this HSJ article and understand that I've also lived through it too. But this was a court of law, not the NHS.https://twitter.com/shaunlintern/status/600735704101031936?s=21 …
-
I have a law degree as well as my medical degree and was the Chair of the hospital Consent Comittee so am aware of all the issues surrounding these subjects too.
-
Sorry - had to do my regular chores for my mum, (the subject of that last article). You have a law degree but don't recognise the decision of the courts as valid reason to describe someone as a criminal? I don't understand...
- 4 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
It’s a point of view. Pending her appeal?
-
A verdict, not a point of view. I'll account for any appeals if they appear, but none I've seen yet.
-
Bawa-Gawa has twice applied for leave to appeal her criminal conviction over Jack Adcock's death. On both occasions, the grounds she advanced were considered of insufficient merit for the appeal to proceed; and both times she was refused leave.
-
Sorry yes, I should've said 'further appeals'. But I'm not sure on what basis they can do so once refused leave to appeal? That said, nothing would surprise me any more. Guess we'll just have to watch this space for any more twists & turns ahead.
-
Presumably refused because there was no legal basis for appeal. The MPTS found her actions were not ‘deliberate or reckless’ yet the court found her guilty of GNM. Interesting.
-
As best I can tell, where a duty of care exists, the act doesn't have to be reckless for GNM - and if it was deliberate, it would be murder. Inattention and indifference to a risk seem to be key phrases I've seen.
-
Your friend Dr Caldwell is interesting on the prosecutions medical evidence at the trial.
-
He generally is. But I'm still waiting for that transcript to be released so we can all see what the public are supposed to have confidence in. Partial facts only allow for partial conclusions. I'm still uncomfortable with that.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
The fact is - right or wrong - like it or not - she has a criminal record. Gross Negligent Manslaughter.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Can't have it both ways. I would run a mile!
-
Panorama would do we to investigate how bad a dr has to be before they get sacked, if they can find any
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.