How sad, and what a danger to patient safety!

The government should act, and I don’tean tinker with the NHS constitution.

It is more than 24 hours since my posting above, and no-one has challenged it, so I take it that the authorities have no problem with my view.

Great Ormond Street has committed itself to children’s services in Haringey:

Dr Jane Collins, ‘Baby Peter Pledge,’ The Guardian, Friday 29 May 2009 http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2009/may/29/letter-baby-peter

Surely the time has come for Great Ormond Street publicly o distance itself from any attempt to intimidate witnesses and reaffirm its recent commitment to children’s services.

Yours sincerely,

Peter Gooderham

Evidence of systemic management failings might help those individuals who currently face disciplinary proceedings and/or unemployment as a result of the rush to blame individuals for the death of Baby P.

There is also the question of whether those in management positions might themselves now be subject to professional scrutiny by their regulatory bodies.

General Medical Council (GMC) Guidance for doctors is clear about the professional duty to raise concerns about threats to patient safety. Good Medical Practice states at paragraph 6:

“6. If you have good reason to think that patient safety is or may be seriously compromised by inadequate premises, equipment, or other resources, policies or systems, you should put the matter right if that is possible. In all other cases you should draw the matter to the attention of your employing or contracting body. If they do not take adequate action, you should take independent advice on how to take the matter further. You must record your concerns and the steps you have taken to try to resolve them.”

http://www.gmc-uk.org/guidance/good_medical_practice/good_clinical_care_raising_concerns.asp

Paragraph 45 states:

“45. If you have management responsibilities you should make sure that systems are in place through which colleagues can raise concerns about risks to patients, and you must follow the guidance in Management for doctors.”

http://www.gmc-uk.org/guidance/good_medical_practice/working_with_colleagues_conduct_and_performance.asp

The GMC document, Management for doctors, may be found here:

http://www.gmc-uk.org/guidance/ethical_guidance/management_for_doctors.asp

Paragraph 4 states:

“4. You continue to have a duty of care for the safety and well-being of patients when you work as a manager. You remain accountable to the GMC for your decisions and actions even when a non-doctor could perform your management role.”

Paragraph 45 states:

“45. If you are responsible for investigating incidents or complaints you should make sure that:

…
o clinical staff understand their duty to be open and honest about such events with both patients and managers
o all other staff are encouraged to raise genuine concerns they have about the safety of patients, including any risks that may be posed by colleagues
o staff members who raise concerns are protected from unwarranted criticism or actions
o systems are in place to ensure that incidents, concerns and complaints are investigated promptly and fully
o the person or people being investigated are treated fairly”

It seems to me that managers who are also doctors are already at risk of disciplinary proceedings at their professional regulatory body. It would be in their own interests, as well of the interests of patients and colleagues, to stamp on any intimidation of witnesses. Such intimidation, if it were to be carried out, would make their position more hazardous than it already is.

Personally, I can’t even form an opinion in this case, having heard neither side of the story.