Wow. So everybody's going crazy about insisting 1 doctor must be struck off for being convicted of manslaughter, but there are others who previously haven't been? So where was the coverage of those cases? Did I miss them?
-
-
There was the vincristine one. https://www.medicalprotection.org/uk/casebook-and-resources/casebook-may-2014/medicine-and-manslaughter …
2 replies 1 retweet 3 likes -
Sorry Anne, it's only just dawned on me that you're referring to the Dr Freda Mulhem case. Just a 12 month suspension by GMC there. Why is that manslaughter conviction any less damaging to public confidence than
#BawaGarba, one wonders?1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @C7RKY @DrAnneMurphy and
15 years ago the landscape was much less adversarial, legalistic, and dare I say blaming Recently the default has become that the doctor is at fault until proven otherwise. Perhaps .
@jeremy_hunt as Our Dear Leader for most of that time might know why this change has occurred1 reply 1 retweet 1 like -
Replying to @GrumpyOldDoc @DrAnneMurphy and
You could argue that I'm a part of that 1st paragraph shift. Though not by choice, I promise you. But the 2nd paragraph would not be in keeping with my experience I'm afraid. On the contrary in fact. Whatever's changed, I haven't felt it yet.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @C7RKY @GrumpyOldDoc and
I’ve been around long enough to qualify as a cynical old mare. I imagine a black Muslim female dr who failed in her duty to save a cute white child is doomed in the ‘court of public opinion’. Which the GMC is obliged to take account of, under the euphemism ‘public confidence’
2 replies 1 retweet 2 likes -
Replying to @DrAnneMurphy @GrumpyOldDoc and
That would almost smack of deferring to mob rule. I sincerely hope there's something more lawfully robust than just appeasing a crowd behind such cases. Especially one as unpleasant as that might imply.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @C7RKY @GrumpyOldDoc and
Doubt there’s any robust legal definition of what “Maintaining Public Confidence” actually is, or should involve.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @DrAnneMurphy @GrumpyOldDoc and
Well whatever definition GMC chose to work by, you'd at least like to think they would be applying it uniformly. This suggests they haven't done that.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @C7RKY @GrumpyOldDoc and
Unless maintaining uniformity is one of the officially stated priorities, I’m not sure they could prioritise it. They have certain statutory duties. Including ‘protecting public confidence’.http://www.pulsetoday.co.uk/your-practice/regulation/doctors-to-be-scapegoated-under-gmc-fitness-to-practise-plans-says-gerada/20008412.article …
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
I don't think I'm suggesting it be prioritised. Just that once they decide what 'protecting public confidence' is going to look like, they stick to their decision. Unlike the Mulhem / #BawaGarba comparison.
-
-
Replying to @C7RKY @GrumpyOldDoc and
But that’s the point. The public can be far more readily persuaded to have confidence in certain types of doctor.https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2016/10/26/health/doctors-discrimination-racism/index.html …
0 replies 1 retweet 1 likeThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.