ROGUE DOCTORS AND THE GMC
| GENERAL MEDICAL COUNCIL A CABAL OF FREEMASONS? |
Harold Shipman the mass murdering doctor got away with murder for so long because MASONS
run the body responsible for disciplining doctors. All British citizens are at extreme risk
of major medical accidents being covered up to protect masonic doctors like Shipman.
Richard Coleman had sat on a case concerning a psychiatrist's report on a nurse, where the doctor concerned and put in something, in good faith, which turned out not to be true. That doctor had got hauled up to a hearing even though he had had no intention to deceive. That had struck Richard Coleman as being a similar case. This had all led Richard Coleman to begin to question things more. He realised that there was a barrier between him as a member and what the GMC wanted him to know.
Finlay Scott had once told him that transparency was like a greenhouse - you could look in but not enter the room. To RC, that was not transparency at all.
The particular case which Richard Coleman had just mentioned was an example of how things worked. He was a Council member and the President had given him the impression that he had the authority to question things. However when he did so and it got to the President, the door was slammed shut in his face. After that, Richard Coleman thought that Finlay Scott had seen him as a member of the "awkward squad". That was slightly tied up with Richard Coleman’s comments on freemasonry. The GMC had been discussing a code of conduct. They were discussing the issue of relevant interests which needed to be disclosed. He had asked Donald Irvine and Finlay Scott, in the presence of Lady Tumin, whether Finlay Scott was a freemason. Finlay Scott had said that he was not prepared to tell Richard Coleman. Richard Coleman had then been concerned because the President had said that he would put Finlay Scott in charge of dealing with the code of conduct and working out what interests were relevant and needed to be disclosed. Richard Coleman felt that that was not appropriate in view of the Home Affairs Committee saying that those who acted in a judicial capacity they should declare their interest as freemasons.
Richard Coleman had mentioned this whole episode in front of the whole Council. He discussed this with a member of the GMC staff who had agreed with him that all interests should be declared. But after this incident, Finlay Scott had turned on him. Finlay Scott had refused to tell Richard Coleman whether he was a freemason even when it was relevant to the case which Richard Coleman was looking at at the time.
The rules had now changed and freemasonry was in fact something which voluntarily should be disclosed as a relevant interest. Richard Coleman had wondered at the time why Finlay Scott should not declare it. When the GMC had taken out an injunction against Richard Coleman, in a statement which Finlay Scott made to court, he made Richard Coleman out to look like some sort of radical anti-freemasonry campaigner. He thinks four members of the GMC now admitted to being freemasons. The code said that it was a relevant interest, but it was only voluntary for members to declare that. Before this was agreed, Finlay Scott had said in a newspaper that members had to declare any interest as a freemason. Richard Coleman had telephoned the paper and told them that that was not true. At that time only some months later did it change. Andrew Ketteringham had then written to the press saying that Finlay Scott was not a freemason. Richard Coleman had written to Andrew Ketteringham at that point asking why he had done so and whether he had checked with Finlay Scott whether he was a freemason or not or whether Finlay Scott had simply refused to tell him and he had assumed something. It turned out that the latter was the case.
FULL EXTENSIVE ARTICLE HERE
GMC FORCED TO REVEAL FREEMASONS
SEVEN DOCTORS FACE SHIPMAN PROBE
|
| SEXUAL DEVIANT DOCTOR WITH AN UNHEALTHY INTEREST IN CHILDREN |
A family doctor described as a 'deviant' for downloading child-sex stories has escaped being struck off.
Dr Nicholas Spicer, 55, read the paedophile fantasies on his home computer between 2003 and 2007 while working with children as a GP.
He was hauled before a General Medical Council disciplinary hearing, where he was described as 'a sexual deviant with an interest in children'.
But he was cleared of misconduct and banned from practising for just six months 'on grounds of health'.
He was removed from NHS Herefordshire's list of GPs but is free to return to work in another area of the country from as early as July.
Spicer, who worked at the Nunwell surgery in Bromyard, Herefordshire, has also evaded criminal charges because the stories are legally available on the internet.
Child safety groups and even Spicer's wife yesterday condemned the GMC's decision not to strike him off the medical register.
Spicer's disgusted wife Patricia has started divorce proceedings.
She said: 'People and professionals that I have spoken to are mystified about the decision.
'The GMC's mission statement is "protecting doctors, protecting people", but they are not living up to it.'
Spicer is unrepentant and claims his behaviour was down to a medical condition.
He said: 'I have never been accused of being a paedophile, but it is obvious that people might wonder.
'I was examined by seven experts in the field of child-sex offences and six out of seven concluded that I'm not a paedophile.
'They concluded that I was suffering from a mild, well-capsulated medical condition, exacerbated by domestic problems.'
Michael May, spokesman for sexual abuse charity Survivors UK, said: 'I'm appalled by the actions of the GP and the response of the GMC.
'I find it extremely concerning that an educated professional, with intimate access to the most vulnerable members of our community, has been able to exploit a shameful loophole in the law.'
At the hearing, Jason Macadam, solicitor for the GMC, branded Spicer 'a sexual deviant' and said the material was 'abhorrent and repugnant'.
SOURCE
|
| DOOMED CASE AGAINST ROGUE GYNAECOLOGIST |
Women in doomed abuse case sue lawyer on £444,000 in
legal aid
Women whose claims of rape and sexual abuse by a
disgraced gynaecologist were thrown out of court in a
legal debacle are to sue their former solicitor with
cash help from the Law Society.
The women were represented by Jane Loveday, a
solicitor who did nothing else for two years but
pursue, in vain, the sexual assault claims. In the
process, she picked up £444,000 in legal aid fees.
Now, more than a dozen of her clients are saddled with
unexpected legal bills of up to £15,000.
In the wake of the collapse of the case and scathing
criticism from a High Court judge, Miss Loveday's
practice has been put into liquidation. Miss Loveday
faces being struck off while Richard Vosper, her
husband and business partner, is being investigated on
suspicion of impersonating a solicitor, a criminal
offence.
In an unprecedented move, the Law Society - which
became involved when it received reports of papers
being burnt in the garden of Miss Loveday's
office-cum-home on the day of the collapse of the case
in February - is making funds available so former
clients can receive independent legal advice on
whether they can recover from Miss Loveday the costs
they claim they believed they would never have to pay.
The society's initiative was praised this week by Mrs
Justice Hallett. The High Court judge had earlier
expressed "enormous concern" over Miss Loveday's
conduct in pursuing a case in which, it was claimed,
clients' statements were "sexed up" and even
fundamentally altered - in one case turning an
allegation of sexual assault into one of rape.
"Plainly," said the judge, "on the evidence, she's not
fit to be conducting any kind of litigation."
All the women were patients who claimed to have
suffered at the hands of Rodney Ledward, an arrogant
and notoriously incompetent gynaecologist, who
performed a host of botched operations over 15 years
in Kent hospitals before being struck off by the
General Medical Council.
He died four years ago and, nine months later, Miss
Loveday launched a class action against three health
authorities claiming between £100,000 and £600,000 for
each of the 59 alleged sexual assault victims on the
basis of the NHS trusts' supposed negligence.
SOURCE
Surgeon sex attack claims dismissed
|
| GMC LOSES DOCTORS' BACKING |
Doctors have passed a vote of no confidence in the body which regulates them - despite warnings that this could give the government an excuse to step in and take over.
The British Medical Association's (BMA) annual conference voted four to one for a motion calling for radical reform of the General Medical Council (GMC), which deals with doctors accused of poor performance and misconduct.
The GMC has failed us. The GMC is a shambles
Dr Peter Terry, BMA delegate
Although delegates told the conference that they did not want to see the GMC disbanded, or an end to self-regulation of the profession, they agreed that they had no confidence in the way it was structured and run.
The GMC has been under the spotlight over a number of scandals, including serial killer Harold Shipman and disgraced gynaecologist Rodney Ledward.
The GMC responded to the BMA vote by saying it was already introducing wide-ranging reforms.
Dr Peter Terry, proposing the motion, said: "The GMC has failed us. The GMC is a shambles.
"The GMC's record of reform is not good. Without reform there will be no confidence."
He suggested a raft of changes that would transform the GMC's makeup. These included:
A member of the general public as president, and far more lay people deciding on GMC policy
Splitting up the three main roles of the GMC - investigating, holding hearings and educating doctors - and into separate bodies
All medical members of the GMC to be elected, rather than nominated by other bodies
BMA chairman Dr Ian Bogle said that there was likely to be resistance to change from some parts of the GMC, but that the majority of members would work to speed reforms.
He admitted that until reforms were enacted, regulation would "not be as safe as we would like".
Worries
Dr Peter Hawker, leader of the BMA's consultants' committee, said: "What we are trying to do now is to say to our patients: 'We share your worries and concerns."
During the debate, doctors spoke of their "total frustration" at the way the GMC had been run for many years, particularly citing the long delays before doctors suspected of misconduct could either be found guilty or cleared.
Dr David Pickersgill said: "Senior figures in the GMC give the impression that the shortcomings of the GMC have only been apparent for the last few months.
"We have been complaining about them for years."
However, opponents of the "no confidence" motion claimed it could be exploited by those in government favouring far tougher regulation of doctors.
Dr Simon Fradd, a member of the BMA's GPs committee, added: "Who could be sure that ambitious politicians, with a general election nearing, will not choose to use this to act against the medical profession."
Take heart
Dr Bogle said after the vote: "I think the GMC has gone a long way to responding to our views and the public should take heart from what has happened today."
Professor Sir George Alberti, president of the Royal College of Physicians, said: "We are relieved that the BMA has not voted to disband the General Medical Council which would have destroyed self-regulation for doctors."
GMC president Sir Donald Irvine told the BBC: "We have been taking forward a huge package of reforms in an organisation that was very old fashioned and in many ways still is.
"Big change does take some time."
He did not respond to questioning over the possibility of his own resignation.
SOURCE
|
The General Medical Council (GMC) has been severely criticised for the way it handles complaints against doctors.
The attack will intensify growing concern that the council is failing to effectively police the medical profession.
A report by the Policy Studies Institute (PSI) says that the current procedures are confusing, inconsistent and lack openness.
It remains difficult to demonstrate that all doctors in all cases are treated fairly
Policy Studies Institute
GMC officials are accused of failing to establish clear criteria for assessing complaints, and of failing to agree a definition of serious professional misconduct.
The report concludes: "In the absence of evidence of consistency and transparency at all stages of the GMC fitness to practise procedures, it remains difficult to demonstrate that all doctors in all cases are treated fairly, although there is no evidence that they are not."
The failure to lay down clear standards, the report says, has led to problems with consistency at all stages of the complaints process.
Long delays
The GMC has attracted much recent criticism for long delays in handling complaints, and for the way it has dealt with a series of high profile cases.
The council allowed serial killer Harold Shipman to continue to practise despite being found guilty of drugs charges.
The GMC was criticised for its handling of the Richard Neale case
It has also been heavily criticised for not acting sooner to ban Richard Neale.
The North Yorkshire gynaecologist was struck off in Canada in 1985, but allowed to practise in the UK for more than a decade until he was barred last month, having botched surgery on a string of women, and carried out operations without consent.
The British Medical Association also passed a vote of no confidence in the GMC at its annual meeting in June.
The government announced in its NHS Plan last week that a new umbrella organisation would be set up to monitor the work of the council.
The GMC is undergoing radical reform of its structure and workings in a bid to re-establish public confidence.
The study looked at every aspect of the council's processes for handling complaints, from the time an allegation is made to the decision by the Professional Conduct Committee.
It raised concerns that less than half (47%) of complaints assessed by the council's Preliminary Proceedings Committee (PPC)were sent on for a full hearing.
PPC decisions were sometimes difficult to understand, and often not properly explained in the records.
The GMC's two-stage process of screening complains - which pass through a screener before going to the PPC - was also criticised for leading to "unnecessary duplication and delay".
The IPS recommends:
allegations of dishonesty, sexual assault, indecency and violence should bypass the first two stages and be sent straight to a full hearing in front of the Professional Conduct Committee (PCC)
screeners should give reasons for deciding that a complaint did not amount to serious professional misconduct
The PCC, or full hearing, stage is praised by the report for being more transparent - it is held in public.
But it added: "It is not always clear why it considers some cases to constitute serious professional misconduct and not others.
Dr Simon Fradd said he was confident the GMC would reform
"Similarly it is not always clear why some cases are deemed to require more stringent penalties than others."
Lord Patel, a senior GMC spokesman, said: "The report does criticise some aspects of our processes, particularly on consistency and transparency, and offers some challenging recommendations.
"The challenge now is to look urgently at the report's conclusions and take all steps to ensure our procedures are demonstrably fair, objective, transparent and free from discrimination."
Dr Simon Fradd, a senior member of both the British Medical Association and the GMC, said the very fact that the GMC had commissioned the report demonstrated its desire to reform.
"I am confident the GMC takes the flack it is getting extremely seriously and is trying to address its problems.
"It will be for the government and the public to decide whether it is acting quickly enough to reform."
The IPS report was originally commissioned to examine whether the GMC was guilty of racism.
It found no evidence of overt evidence of discrimination against doctors from ethnic minorities, but said the possibility that racism existed could not be ruled out.
SOURCE
|
The General Medical Council (GMC) has come under fire from doctors' leaders who say it has lost the confidence of the public and the medical profession.
Chairman of the British Medical Association (BMA) Dr Ian Bogle said the GMC was guilty of vague "vision statements" but no practical measures for tightening up regulation.
We have a regulatory system that is under attack by the government, which has lost confidence from doctors, which doctors worry no longer has the confidence of patients
Dr Mac Armstrong, BMA
The GMC has been criticised for failing to take action against Harold Shipman, the former GP found guilty of murdering 15 of his patients, who had previous convictons for forging prescriptions and misusing drugs to feed his own addiction.
There have also been allegations that it favours the medical profession over patients.
The GMC has set out plans for a radical overhaul of its own systems, increasing lay membership, speeding up disciplinary procedures and strengthening punishments for those found guilty of misconduct.
The government is also looking at self-regulation of the medical profession.
But Dr Bogle said, following a meeting of the BMA's council: "It was felt the leadership was coming up with vision statements but not with practical statements about how to deliver the vision on the ground.
"This is causing considerable anxiety among doctors. Unless they can turn the vision into what is actually going to happen, these anxieties are going to carry on."
Clear statement
He added: "What we are looking for is a clear statement from the GMC leadership about exactly what is going on and how the Government are receiving its suggestions."
His criticism came as chief executive of the GMC Finlay Scott was facing questions from the Commons Health Committee.
He called on the governmnet to clarify rules surrounding the disclosure of information about a doctor to a third party following the Shipman case.
Mr Scott told MPs he was concerned about issues raised by the Shipman case and had written to health secretary Alan Milburn.
BMA secretary Dr Mac Armstrong said that members of the association's council felt the medical profession's regulatory system was "the worst of all worlds".
He added: "There was a feeling that we have a regulatory system that is under attack by the government, which has lost confidence from doctors, which doctors worry no longer has the confidence of patients."
The BMA has set up a working party to draw up proposals for reforming the GMC. There are fears that if the government rejects the GMC's own proposals, self-regulation will be scrapped.
Mr Scott said after the Commons hearing: "We have attracted much criticism in recent months, some of it unfair and unwarranted. But we recognise that change is needed.
"We are determined to get this right for patients and will not be blown off course."
SOURCE
|
| GMC TO REVEAL MASONIC LINKS (FROM 2000) |
Members of the General Medical Council will be required to declare whether they are freemasons in a move to reassure the public about the fairness of the doctors' ruling body.
There has been growing public concern at the failure of the GMC to act more quickly against some failing doctors, leading to unsubstantiated rumours within the Government that freemasonry may have influenced its decisions.
Now, in a move to reassure public opinion, the GMC has decided to require all its 104 members to sign a declaration of private interests which for the first time will include membership of the freemasons.
The Independent on Sunday has learned that prominent doctors' leaders who are freemasons include Dr Sandy Macara, the former head of the BMA, although he told colleagues he had not attended a lodge in 20 years.
GMC sources said they believed one senior member of the GMC was a freemason, and would declare it in the register. The move was welcomed by Dartford Labour MP Dr Howard Stoate, a family doctor, who has been leading a campaign at Westminster to make the GMC more open.
"The public have a right to know whether members of the GMC have declarable interests, and that includes being a freemason," said Dr Stoate.
The register will remain optional for consultants and doctors. Members of the ruling council and heads of departments of the GMC will be advised to make declarations.
The GMC's initiative goes further than that of the Home Office, which has attempted to get the judiciary and the police to declare their membership of the freemasons on a voluntary register.
It will be seen as a further attempt to persuade the Government to allow the GMC to reform its own procedures rather than to use the big stick of legislation.
It follows criticism of the GMC's failure to act more quickly to strike off incompetent or dangerous doctors, including consultant gynaecologist Rodney Ledward and GP Harold Shipman, who was jailed for murdering his patients.
Alan Milburn, the Health Secretary, warned that he was prepared to act, with legislation if necessary, but the GMC appears to have persuaded him to drop that threat for the time being.
The GMC has suggested that it should be brought under Parliamentary scrutiny for the first time by the Commons Select Committee on Health, and it is consulting on moves that could make it easier for patients to have doctors struck off the medical register in future.
"We have got a register of interests. It was voluntary but we are asking council members to declare their interests, and it will be published. We should have all the returns by the end of December," said a GMC source.
Council members were advised in a report by the council that there was considerable public interest in the alleged influence of freemasonry in public life. "It has become apparent that silence on the issue is not sufficient," said the report.
"The Council needs to make clear whether or not freemasonry should be declared. This should not be left to individual members. The aim of the register is not to satisfy curiosity but to support transparency and probity."
SOURCE
|
| DOCTORS WERE ALLOWED TO RUIN WOMEN'S LIVES |
Two doctors who left a trail of damaged and abused women during careers that lasted decades were allowed to continue practising because of a culture of complacency, separate inquiries reported yesterday.
The scandals of the disgraced gynaecologist Richard Neale, who botched operations on women over more than a decade, and the GP Clifford Ayling, who was jailed for sexually abusing his patients over 30 years, have gone down in the annals of medical dishonour as among the worst in memory.
Both were doctors of the old school, overbearing, arrogant and dismissive, who systematically betrayed their patients' trust. But they were allowed to get away with unacceptable behaviour for so long because patients, colleagues and managers did not dare to challenge their authority.
Reports from the inquiries into the two doctors, announced in June 2001, were published by John Reid, the Health Secretary, yesterday.
Neale, a consultant in North Yorkshire, was struck off the medical register in 2000 after being found guilty of a series of blunders that left 14 women in pain, incontinent or unable to bear children.
Ayling, 72, a GP who worked in Folkestone, Kent, was jailed for four years in 2000 after being convicted of 13 counts of indecent assault on patients between 1991 and 1998.
A group of 31 women abused by Ayling accepted damages of £350,000 from the Kent and Medway Strategic Health Authority yesterday. The women, who will receive sums of up to £20,000 each, had sued the health authority which employed him.
The inquiry reports into the two doctors, which together run to 600 pages, make a series of recommendations, including a call for reform of the NHS complaints system to ensure that patients' voices are heard.
In her foreword to the Neale inquiry report, Judge Suzan Matthews, the chairman, says: "A sense of complacency undoubtedly contributed to what occurred. There is no room for complacency and there remains an urgent need for a root and branch change in attitudes and culture within the NHS."
The Ayling inquiry report, chaired by Dame Anna Pauffley, says that despite the "long history of continuing unease" about the GP's behaviour generated among his professional colleagues, it was ignored.
"They recast what they heard into explanations which they could find acceptable and in so doing deceived themselves and failed their patients," the report says.
Mr Reid said the Government would respond in detail to the reports after the inquiry into the GP serial killer Harold Shipman, which is also examining the NHS complaints system, publishes its final report later this year.
The Neale inquiry says that one of the most disturbing aspects of the case was that in 1984 Neale had been struck off the medical register in Canada, where he had emigrated in the late 1970s, after the deaths of two patients, but this failed to sound alarm bells in Britain.
Neale returned to the UK and got a job as a consultant at the Friarage Hospital at Northallerton in North Yorkshire, where he worked from 1985 to 1995. Despite knowing of his record in Canada, neither the General Medical Council in the UK nor his NHS employers, the Yorkshire Regional Health Authority, took action. He was able to continue operating, causing patients "unnecessary suffering and trauma", for more than a decade. Judge Matthews said this was the "most perplexing aspect" of the case in her 370-page report. "How such a situation can ever be acceptable or fair must now be considered with urgency," she said.
The GMC said in a statement yesterday that it "could not defend" its practice 15 years ago and had taken steps to see that it could not happen again.
Tighter monitoring of doctors' competence has been introduced since Neale was struck off, but the inquiry calls for better checks before doctors are recruited to identify concerns from past employment, and for security of tenure for consultants to be ended.
The inquiry into the Ayling case said there had been allegations of "disturbing" instances where his behaviour was "overtly sexual and broke the boundaries of the trust and integrity patients have the right to expect from their doctor" over many years.
His approach to patients was described as "over-familiar" where sensitive and intimate examinations were being carried out which "bordered on the unprofessional" and was distressing to both patient and observer.
The inquiry team found little published guidance on dealing with such "sexualised behaviour" and said there was an "urgent need" to address this to ensure that NHS trusts recognised and responded to such concerns.
It says all patients must be offered a chaperone for intimate examinations.
Mr Reid said changes in the National Health Service in recent years had addressed weaknesses identified in the inquiries, including improvements in the complaints procedures.
He said Neale "fell short" of the high standards patients had a right to expect which had caused them "unnecessary distress".
The abuse of patients by Ayling was "completely unacceptable" and patients should never be put in a position where doctors or other staff could "take advantage" of their trust.
THE GP...
Clifford Ayling relied on the authority vested in doctors to pursue his own sexual gratification with his patients. Most were too frightened and confused to question his behaviour. His colleagues were reluctant to believe rumours of unnecessary internal examinations and his readiness to make female patients strip.
The local medical committee in Folkestone, where he practised, was perceived by local GPs as a 'safe haven for troubling knowledge' to whom responsibility for further action could be entrusted. The inquiry report says this is 'inappropriate today'.
Ayling was finally brought to trial in 2000, almost 30 years after the first alleged indecent assault in 1971. He was jailed for four years and later struck off.
...AND THE GYNAECOLOGIST
During a 14-year period from the mid-1980s to the late 1990s, Richard Neale caused appalling suffering to scores of women from North Yorkshire to the Isle of Wight by carrying out operations that were beyond his competence in a negligent and reckless manner.
He misled patients about the risks, failed to inform GPs of complications and lied about his qualifications. He was finally struck off the medical register and banned from practising in 2000 after being found guilty of ruining the lives of 13 women.
The report describes him as an "old-fashioned consultant with personality and behavioural issues that raised eyebrows but which were tolerated and overlooked because no one challenged his clinical competence".
SOURCE
|
| GMC NAMES FREEMASON MEMBERS |
General Medical Council members have been forced to reveal whether they are freemasons.
And their details have now been published on a register of interests, which is open to public scrutiny.
There had been accusations that the General Medical Council (GMC) was adversely influenced by freemasonry and that this could be interfering with justice during their conduct cases.
There were even concerns raised that freemason doctors appearing before the GMC might have tried to use their connections to get the cases against them dropped, particularly at the early stages.
But the register, which also includes details of political parties members belong to and any consultancies they work for, has revealed there are only four freemasons within their 104 strong membership.
I was unhappy about one particular case. I was concerned that one component did involve freemasonry
Dr Richard Coleman, former GMC member
The register lists Sir Sandy Macara, the former British Medical Association (BMA) chair; Dr Simon Fradd, a negotiator for the BMA's GPs' committee; Dr Ronald Zeegen, a consultant physician and gastroenterologist and lay member Mr James Campbell Morton as freemasons.
The GMC voted for the register after growing internal and external pressure to include freemasonry in the register of members interests.
Within a few weeks the GMC will also name any of their senior staff executives who are freemasons.
There were concerns that the council could not be considered to be fully transparent without this.
Transparency
A spokeswoman for the GMC said publishing the register would answer criticisms against them that they were not being open enough.
"We gave an undertaking in the interests of transparency and openness to publish a register of members interests and we have now done so."
Dr Richard Coleman, a GP and ex-GMC member, first raised concerns about freemasonry a number of years ago.
He told BBC News Online that in the past there had been concerns that freemasonry connections could have played a part in influencing the outcome in one particular case.
But Dr Coleman was very clear that he was not referring to any decision made by any of the freemasons named in this register.
He said that by being open and transparent the GMC was distancing itself from any imagined or real criticism.
"I was unhappy about one particular case. I was concerned that one component did involve freemasonry.
"Because it is secret it did not rule out the possibility that there was some bias."
Dr Coleman said Lord Woolf had made it clear that anyone involved in a judicial capacity must declare whether they are freemasons - he said the GMC now complied with this.
GMC member Dr Krishna Korlipara, a GP in Bolton, said publishing the list would show they were transparent and above board.
"I have always been an advocate for openness and transparency and that people should declare anything that could be seen as a conflict of interest.
"I think this is an excellent idea. Now it is all in the open and no body can argue that the members are not acting perfectly honourably," he said.
Fellow GMC member Dr Surendra Kumar, a GP in Widnes, said: "I think in the current climate of transparency it is absolutely vital that one declares one's interests."
SOURCE
|
| SEVEN DOCTORS FACE SHIPMAN PROBE |
Seven doctors face misconduct hearings by the General Medical Council (GMC)
after criticisms by the official report into killer doctor Harold Shipman.
The GMC has confirmed the doctors will appear before its Professional
Conduct Committee.
The former Hyde GP, found hanged at Wakefield Prison in January, murdered
between 230 and 275 people over a 23-year period.
The GMC is also investigating two other doctors.
GPs probe
Six of those facing the hearings, Dr Peter Bennett, Dr Susan Booth, Dr
Jeremy Dirckze, Dr Stephen Farrar, Dr Alistair MacGillivray and Dr Rajesh
Patel, worked as GPs in the Hyde area.
The other doctor, who will appear before the committee on 27 September, is
retired pathologist Dr David Lyle Bee.
Two other doctors, Dr Murtaza Husian Husaini and Dr Geriant Brown, are being
investigated by the GMC.
A GMC statement said it was aware of concerns about both doctors and it was
"looking to see what action, if any, may be necessary."
SOURCE
|
| GENERAL MEDICAL COUNCIL CHALLENGED BY IMO |
Sent: 31 Aug 2004 14:15
To: pressoffice@gmc-uk.org
Subject: SHIPMANS SECRET SOCIETY CONNECTIONS
to GMC
In light of more doctors being investigated in the SHIPMAN case we are
seeking information to show freemasonry was the major contributing factor in
Harold Shipman being able to murder so many without detection.
We ask the GMC to confirm or deny Shipmans masonic link.
If we do not receive confirmation we can only assume freemasonry and
freemasonry within the GMC is why so many innocents have been allowed to die
at the hands of masonic doctors .
Please also provide were we can access the public record showing the
register of public interests
International Mens Organisation
From: JTupper@gmc-uk.org
Subject: RE: SHIPMANS SECRET SOCIETY CONNECTIONS
We do not require doctors to disclose to us whether they are freemasons. As the story you have copied below states, it is our members that we place this requirement on. The register of interests can be found in the About Us section of our website.
To: JTupper@gmc-uk.org
Subject: RE: SHIPMANS SECRET SOCIETY CONNECTIONS
Dear Mr Tupper (General Medical Council UK)
It should be of the outmost importance that the GMC find out and disclose the information requested and in the public interest.
Failure to do so will be in clear breach of the GMC's code of conduct to ensure ALL steps are taken to protect the public from any undue influences within the medical profession in the UK.
Our organisations have brought this to your attention and to dismiss such an important matter shows signs of a conspiracy to cover up the true origins of why Shipman could remain undetected .The MASONIC influence runs throughout the legal system in the UK and despite POLICE being informed about these unusual deaths they were complicit in its cover up as were all the lawyers and judges connected with the closure and distribution of the assets of the deceased Shipman murdered.
We have no doubt Shipman as well as Thomas Hamilton(Dunblane) and Ian Huntley(Soham) all had been given protection by the masonic police force operating in the UK.As they had been reported many times but were ignored by police officers who join this creepy organisation to ensure they remain police ,get promotion and protect murderous brothers.
It is very very clear to our organisations that the Law Societies of the UK,the GMC ,The police force and judiciary all operate under masonic control and protect fellow brothers ,even mass murderers such as Shipman.He provided a great deal of money for that legal system as they all plundered the victims estates on the deaths of the 100's if not 1000's killed by Shipman.
The responsibility for those deaths does not lie with Shipman but with the GMC who failed to have sufficient procedures in place to protect the public against a mass murdering doctor the second largest mass murderer in the world.
We ask that the GMC take IMMEDIATE measures to EXPOSE those influences and bring into force measures to STOP any more deaths from failures or lack of procedures.
We continue to inform our worldwide network of the steps being taken to protect all UK citizens and seek justice for all those families destroyed by Shipmans mass murdering .
We have also just received details of Operation Ore list which contains doctors names regulated by the GMC at
http://www.survivorsswindon.com/ore.htm
How much longer can the GMC justify their failures to act and how many more deaths and abuses have to be confirmed before the GMC council take measures to finally stop the appalling behaviour of doctors in the UK who seemingly have no such measures in place to properly regulate their conduct.
International Mens Organisation
|
|
