Professionals Against Child Abuse

In the UK, on June 1st 2009, there was a Panorama TV programme about Dr David Southall entitled “a very dangerous doctor”.

Soon after the broadcast a complaint about the programme was made to Ofcom.

Ofcom’s response is published in the Ofcom broadcast bulletin issue 148 on page 138 and on. (see link below).

Needless to say the complaint was not upheld.

Ofcom is The Office of Communications, a government body.

Link:
http://www.ofcom.org.uk/tv/obb/prog_cb/obb148/Issue148.pdf

PACA has been supporting a Consultant Paediatrician who worked in Haringey before Baby P died.

This is a link to an article on the Sunday Telegraph website:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/baby-p/6739202/If-Great-Ormond-Street-had-listened-to-me-Baby-Peter-would-still-be-alive-says-consultant.html

On reading this article PACA has released the following press statement:

6/12/2009

STATEMENT BY PACA: DR KIM HOLT SHOULD BE THANKED AND REINSTATED

[Download PDF version]

For immediate release:

PACA (Professionals Against Child Abuse) wishes to express its support for Dr Kim Holt, Consultant Paediatrician, following the publication of information about concerns she and others raised in 2006 about the management of children’s health services in Haringey.[1]

Dr. Holt was one of four Consultant Paediatricians who wrote to their managers listing numerous concerns which they had raised for at least two years at that stage.[2] Many of these were the same as factors identified by the Care Quality Commission when it reviewed the death of Baby P.[3] Only one of the four Consultants is currently in post.

PACA notes with concern the fact that Dr Holt has been excluded from her job for over two years, is currently on a temporary secondment, with no long term job security and that she has always been clear that she wanted to return to her original post. PACA notes that Dr. Holt stated that considerable efforts were made to have her removed.

It appears that Dr. Holt is yet another NHS whistleblower who has been badly treated by the NHS after raising legitimate concerns. This is unacceptable. Following the Stafford scandal, health ministers repeatedly stated that whistleblowers enjoy full legal protection from the Public Interest Disclosure Act 1998.4 If this were truly the case, Dr. Holt would not have suffered these detriments. We would welcome a statement from a minister on this matter now.

PACA suggests that Dr. Holt should be thanked by her employer, Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Trust, which should also offer her a public apology. It should reinstate her and supply the necessary resources to allow her to do her job. It should also compensate her for the unnecessary costs she has incurred, including those relating to unnecessary legal costs and maintaining her skills whilst excluded from the workplace. We do not see that any other course of action is in the interests of vulnerable children, the wider community, and the NHS.

We note that Great Ormond Street’s spokesperson finds it “difficult to comment until an independent investigation is completed.” We understand that the report from the investigation was supposed to have been published in September 2009. Ongoing delay appears to prevent Great Ormond Street from addressing important issues. We believe that it is in the public interest for that report to be published. When it is, PACA members will study the report to see what implications it may have for other individuals involved.

John Bridson Chair PACA

—

Notes

1 BMA News Review, front page headline, 21 November 2009; Sunday Telegraph, 6 December 2009.

2 A. Gilligan, Doctors raised alarm over ‘high risk’ at Baby P clinic, Evening Standard 12th May 2009

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23689559-doctors-raised-alarm-over-high-risk-at-baby-p-clinic.do

3 CQC, Review of the involvement and action taken by health bodies in relation to the case of Baby P, 2009 [Draws on previous independent investigation] http://www.cqc.org.uk/_db/_documents/Baby_P.pdf

4 See, for example, Ben Bradshaw MP, Minister of State for Health, House of Commons Hansard 18 May 2009.col 1227W.

Information about PACA: Children are the most vulnerable members of society. Sometimes the very people who are expected to protect them place them at risk. It is then that professionals who work with children have a duty to protect them. PACA believes that vulnerable children need dedicated paediatricians, nurses, social workers, teachers and the law to protect them. PACA was formed in response to high profile cases against paediatricians at the General Medical Council at which it became clear that the present regulatory systems did not protect children and were open to abuse by those who sought to discredit professionals who stood up publicly for children’s rights. PACA advocates for children’s rights by campaigning for regulatory organisations to be trained in child protection, for the interests of the child to be paramount, and for professionals who stand up for children to receive fair treatment.

STATEMENT From Dr Southall following the Appeal conclusion 22/5/09

Introduction

Dr Southall was struck off the medical register by the GMC pending an Appeal.The Appeal was heard and a judgment published in May 2009.

This confirmed the GMC decision to strike him off, there was just one more chance, a short two hour verbal appeal to be held in October 2009.

STATEMENT From Dr Southall following the Appeal conclusion 22/5/09

“Although very disappointed with this judgment, I intend to seek leave for a further Appeal.

“I wish to make it clear that I completely deny the accusation made by Mrs M who has been supported in pursuing her false allegations by Mrs Penny Mellor, the leader of a long-standing campaign against my child protection work.

“The version of what happened in that interview with Mrs M as part of a section 47 child protection inquiry requested of me by the Family Court was exactly as described by the Team Leader in Social Work for the case who was present throughout.

“This Social Worker had been qualified for 10 years, possessed a number of higher professional qualifications in child protection and had met me along with her supervisor on only one occasion prior to and not at all after the interview.

“In her report prepared for the GMC hearing, she stated “I am certain that Professor Southall did not make such an allegation during that interview.”

“I find it difficult now to understand how any doctor in the UK can undertake a sensitive discussion or perform an intimate examination in the presence of an appropriate chaperone and be safe from false allegations.”

The BMA has released a child protection tool kit for doctors.

From the site: The aim of this tool kit is to provide a brief and accessible guide to doctors’ responsibilities in child protection cases in England and Wales.

You can find out more here.

On the 1st of June, Panorama broadcast a programme entitled “A Very Dangerous Doctor”

This programme revealed the truth behind the Southall debacle.

Those of you who access this site might pass this link on to friends and colleagues.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00l6ds5

[Note: this programme can only be viewed from within the UK]

The Lancet expresses its view on the current situation in Child Protection, making an urgent suggestion: a UK Commission on Child Protection.

Lancet Child Protection editorial (PDF)

The outcome of the Southall appeal was astonishing. Read PACA’s letter published in the Lancet.

Lancet PACA letter (PDF)

Following the erasure of Dr David Southall from the GMC medical register.

PACA is saddened to learn that David Southall’s appeal in the High Court
today was unsuccessful in overturning the decision of the GMC’s Fitness to
Practise Committee to erase him from the medical register in December 2007.

The GMC have held three Fitness to Practise Hearings against David Southall:
in 2004, 2006-7 and in 2008. Only in the 2007 Hearing did the outcome lead
to a permanent restriction on David Southall’s ability to practise medicine.
PACA believes the GMC have acted inappropriately and have been improperly
influenced by a skilful and hostile media campaign by parents involved in
alleged child protection cases and their advocates. PACA is now concerned
that today’s result will have further serious and negative effects on the
willingness with which doctors will engage in child protection.

Internationally acclaimed and eminent paediatricians involved in child
protection have sustained repeated harassment in recent years, including
from the GMC. PACA considers that the GMC preliminary assessment procedures
have been ignorant of the nature of child protection procedures in the
Family Courts and that this case should never have been brought against
David Southall; that he has always given honestly held opinions, based on
extensive experience in complex child protection cases and solely with the
purpose of protecting children has never been questioned.

The disciplinary actions of the GMC, today supported by the High Court, will
be a further deterrent to paediatricians and other health professionals from
engagement in child protection work. Last year, the Royal College of
Paediatrics and Child Health voted overwhelmingly to express their grave
concerns about the GMC’s actions in the cases of both Professor Meadow and
David Southall. PACA considers today’s action will be a disservice to
children. The GMC should act only to encourage doctors to report child
protection concerns and engage in child protection work, by making them feel
safe from disciplinary actions, unless the doctor has been shown to have
acted incompetently or with malice.

We will provide full comment when we have read the full judgement.

[Update - the full judgement can be read here: Final_Southall_22_05_09.pdf (236 kb)]

Press Release - 10/02/2009

The GMC Fitness to Practise Committee has now acknowledged shortcomings, pointed out by PACA, in GMC procedures relating to complaints involving child protection. Following a Freedom of Information request, PACA has now discovered that the GMC plans to change its procedures.

The GMC acknowledged that they currently have no power to deal with serial or patently vexatious complainants, and that this may create unfairness for individual doctors who are either the specific target of a vexatious complainant or the random target of a serial complainant. Such circumstances are well recognised in Child Protection work, where some perpetrators of child abuse try and avoid responsibility for their actions by criticising the professionals involved.
The GMC has commented ‘the current rules do not provide us with the flexibility to deal as effectively as we would like with serial complaints or complaints that are clearly vexatious. Although such complaints are relatively uncommon, they can be very resource intensive and are unfair to doctors.’ At a meeting of the Fitness to Practice Committee in November 2008, GMC members agreed to pursue a change to their rules to allow them to reject serial or patently vexatious complaints.

A PACA spokesperson said ‘We are extremely pleased that the GMC has responded constructively to our reasoned arguments about the particular circumstances of complaints in Child Protection. Whilst we are in general highly supportive of the work of the GMC in maintaining professional standards to promote patient safety, we feel that the needs of children for protection were previously being overlooked. ‘

Doctors involved in this work may find themselves caught between the interests of parents and children, and may find themselves the subject of complaint by aggrieved parents who have been implicated in child abuse. As we see from the tragedy of cases like Victoria Climbie and others since, if children are to be properly protected, then professionals must be able to voice and act on reasonably held concerns without fear of being accused of malpractice. This GMC decision is a major step forward and we applaud them for it. ‘
Further information and comment is available from PACA via

http://www.paca.org.uk

Downloadable version of the press release (PDF)

PACA has been drawing attention for a long time to the GMC’s lack of a vexatious complaints policy. Vexatious complaints have been a serious problem for Health Professionals trying to safeguard children. For this reason as well as sending, out this press release, three PACA members have written a paper for publication in the Archives of Diseases of Childhood on A Way To Restore British Paediatricians’ Engagement With Child Protection Arch. Dis. Child. 2009 : adc.2008.154997v1

Here is the link:
http://adc.bmj.com/cgi/rapidpdf/adc.2008.154997v1