A Doctor's Note
iPM has been looking at a story that's causing much concern among doctors. The row involves the suspension of a junior doctor over comments made on an internet forum, which, it's claimed insulted another doctor. Specifically, Professor Dame Carol Black. She is Director for Health and Work for HMG, a powerful and controversial figure.
The Inverness Courier has the details, and reports that:
The incident has already created a minor celebrity status for the Inverness trainee, who is known only as Dr Scot Junior on web-blogs and other internet forums.
That's certainly the case with a host of medical blogs weighing in on the issue, including Dr Rant, Dr Grumble, The Witch Doctor and the blog NHSexposed
For more on this, Eddie has been speaking to Dr.Tim Ringrose from doctors.net.uk, who run the forums where the message was posted.
UPDATE: In his response Tim urges people to think before posting online. The concern of many bloggers is that the thought passing through the mind of a doctor about to post to a forum may not be, "unprofessional language may get me in trouble" but, "criticising senior figures may get me in trouble". It's why the debate around the issue, while partially about the proportionality of the action taken against the doctor in question, has also been about the ability of doctors to criticise those in charge of their profession. Remedy UK has plenty to say on that issue.
Email us
Our Twitter
Join our Facebook group
Listen to iPM
Technorati
Google
Ice Rocket
© MMIX~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~12~RS~)
CommentsSign in
You need to sign in to contribute to this page. If you're new to BBC Blogs, creating your membership is quick and easy.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This story is about the abuse of power and has focussed on the junior doctor who has become a target for vindictiveness. The real story should be about why he felt the need to make comments which were so strongly worded. That story is about the disaster of Modernising Medical Careers, which has had a very bad effect on junior doctor training already, with more to come, and may have had, or will have, similar effects on patient care. It is also about the people in the higher echelons in medical politics who have failed to take responsibility for their mistakes, but instead choose to damage the career of a junior doctor for comments which were posted for a short time on a medical blog. Sticks and stone, Professor Paice. Ironically in taking this vexatious complaint forward, Paice has drawn attention to her role and accountability, and that of Carol Black, which ought to be examined by the media.
Complain about this comment
BBC bigotry; paid for by the tv-licence.
Complain about this comment
In my view, Tim Ringrose is of course wrong. He runs a doctors only website. There are many comments that may not be acceptable to various people. We are all different afterall. I had expected him to support Dr Scot Jnr because no doctor posting and discussing on the internet should be subjected to suspension procedures. The GMC guidance is very clear on this. It doesn't matter how uncomfortable this is for women who are clearly out of touch with reality.
We live in a democratic country for a reason. That is because everyone has the right to free speech. If they feel defamed then the correct recourse is the court NOT the person's job.
Free speech has been curbed in the medical profession. I know this because every GMC investigation I have been subjected to involved material I have written. I am cleared but at what price? I don't think suspension procedures or GMC procedures should be used as a sword of damocles against doctors. Life post Shipman is hard enough as it is with doctors having their fundemantal rights violated.
Any normal person would have had the comment removed and moved on with their lives. Paice and Needham clearly feel differently and have magnified a very minor incident into one that puts their own failings under the microscope
Regards
Dr Rita Pal
NHS Exposed
NHS Exposed Blog
Ward87
Complain about this comment
There was an advert on the TV in the 50's - 'get the strength of the insurance companies around you'. The fellow academics are the shield for those further up the greasy pole than relatively junior but professional functionaries.
Once upon a time we all shut our mouths & expected deference from juniors: that was a different world.
The great & good need to get real before they are cast from their pinacles of self-congratulation.
Complain about this comment
What this SHOULD be about is the abuse of her position by the Dean. Suspension is supposed to be used only where there is a clincal concern about the doctor- not just because they dared to write soemthing critical about their elders and betters.
Much of the UK's medical Establishment is rotten.
Complain about this comment
Oh, and thank God for Dr Rita Pal, who has had the guts to complain about the two deans in question to the GMC. Sadly, because the GMC is also part of the Establishment, it will do precisely NOTHING.
Complain about this comment
A very disappointing treatment of this vital story.
Dr Rant is currently the most widely read doctor blog in the NHS, and has been heavily involved from the start, and yet we were not asked to comment on this issue.
Our views on Dr Ringrose's 'defend DNUK' approach are better left on our blog (warning: strong language).
However, vital points were missed:
1. Suspension is intended only for cases where patient safety is at risk. It has been made clear there are no clinical concerns, so suspension is against DoH guidelines.
2. The GMC has made it clear in writing that they are primarily concerned with behaviour at work, and that actions of doctors away from the clinical environment should be dealt with through normal channels. This was not done.
3. Swearing in private is not a GMC offense. DNUK is a private, doctors-only, password protected site. The page Dr Junior used is accessed by a handful of invited medical journalists, but they are not allowed to quote from the pages without permission.
4. If private behaviour was a GMC issue, then Professor Needham (the Scottish Dean who is reportedly responsible for the suspension) would need to suspend herself for her infamous 'taking hemlock on a hill with a married man' incident which was widely reported by the press at the time.
5. Clearly, we can deduce, that the reason for the outrageous and hypocritical abuse of power in this case is to crush a junior doctor who has been an outspoken critic of Dame Carol Black.
Dame Black is a much hated figure by junior doctors because she was at the center of the disastrous Modernising Medical Careers changes last year (widely reported in the media). The junior doctor in question - quite understandably - became very upset upon hearing that Dame Black had stood for, and accepted, re-election as head of the Academy of Royal Colleges.
He then requested the post be removed, and apologised. It was only seen by a handful of people.
Furthermore, Professor Piace - the London dean who complained to Dean Needham upon reading the attack on her friend, Carol Black - has claimed she was following GMC guidance. This is wrong: the GMC have made it clear in writing that Section 35 of Good Medical Practice (treating colleagues with respect) applies to colleagues you work with. It certainly does not apply to unaccountable medical politicians who sit on dozens of quangos.
Finally, these women are very powerful and wholly unaccountable. Prof Needham is a director of the Scottish doctor's defense organisation (MDDUS) and lives with a man who is a staunch labour supporter (reported in the press). Dame Black is a New Labour figure, and Prof Paice is a strong supporter of Dame Black.
The suggestion of a political conspiracy to silence political dissent using clinical systems designed to protect patients is abhorrent.
It is these issues that the BBC has a mandate and duty to explore, and it is very sad indeed that this vital job is being left to a small number of bloggers.
Dark days.
Complain about this comment
Is there a reason that my initial post is still being moderated three days later?
Complain about this comment
One of the reasons Dr Grumble felt that the action taken against Dr Scott was a bit heavy handed was that the sort of language he used has become commonplace. Young people need to learn how to behave without causing offence and using language appropriately is part of this. Unfortunately the BBC does not help our youngsters to learn these social skills. Worse the BBC even pays people obscene sums of money to encourage behaviour which to say the very least is in rather poor taste. What's more they use Dr Grumble's licence money for this. This was not just a joke that had gone but the tip of an iceberg of endemic BBC rottenness.
Why hasn't Jonathan Ross been sacked since his behaviour was far worse than that of Dr Scott?
Complain about this comment
View these comments in RSS