Thursday 21 July 2011
postscript
If any of my lawyers or former dental 'colleagues' at DP find my criticism inappropriate, I will withdraw it the moment Mr Crabb, Mr Parsons, Mr Pal and Ms Atkin etc withdraw their clearly stated, consensual and handsomely compensated views.
Cross-examination- barrister Thomas Cosgrove
So here it is, after three and a half years and nearly a quarter of a million pounds spent by the various regulators and indemnifiers. The GDC barrister Tom Cosgrove had an arsenal of written material and staff testimony, and my own 'defence' barrister had just said it was all authentic. I had received little coaching in what to say, and I had to explain how all this evidence had come to be created, without being able to tell the truth about it (that is a lame description. Please read the 'PCT meeting' post for clarification). Remember that the original staff complaint, and the staff testimony, had been prepared jointly, and that the staff had been working together daily for three and a half years- just about enough time to get their story straight. The main points of their complaint were entirely uncorroborated by any one single patient, still less by those tedious details I have seen obtained elsewhere such as times, dates and locations (with the exception of one burp mentioned in one written complaint). The dishonesty of the staff had been discussed at length at the Primary Care Trust, and the written evidence was riddled with at least eight examples of provable dishonesty by named staff members. Mr Holgate had been asked very few penetrating questions as he had never seen my 'unacceptable and wide ranging' behaviour and yet he had told two whoppers on the stand, for proof of which lies there was documentary confirmation. He had previously made a very serious and entirely implausible written accusation of racism in connection with the wallets, one of the main accusations against me. However none of this seemed to trouble the saintly Mr Cosgrove as he went at me as if I was a predatory paedophile. The case was shot through with dishonesty, and if that does not make him (and anyone else who accepted this bullshit on face value ie everyone else in the room (including, at one point, me)) dishonest I don't know what could.
I had some explanation initially but soon ran out. I was having to explain why other people, acting with malice, had chosen to behave in the way that they did and I could not. I had an idea what the phrase 'my mind went blank' meant but had never experienced the feeling repeatedly. All the aggression that I had suffered was being directed at me again one hundred fold as if it had happened yesterday, and I had to go back to my hotel, sleep, and do it again the next day. The memory disgusts me, and the thought of my lawyers sitting there watching me having dumped me in it disgusts me even more.
I changed my story in two significant aspects. The first, that I admitted to being rude and sarcastic to the staff, is of little bearing as they had been making my life a misery and I would have been ashamed if I had done anything else. The second, however, haunts me. Mr Cosgrove had the complaints log in front of him and was making me account for the number of complaints (this is some of the evidence that was scored through with alterations and duplications). The two consecutive entries that were proof of the foul collusion in the practice- because they were written in the same (anonymous) hand and contained identical language, the chances of which happening innocently being nought- I admitted to be genuine. All the letters and emails I had written, all the travelling I had done and all the money I had spent came to nothing. For three and a half years I had fought my corner successfully more or less alone, and here I was admitting that the evidence incriminated me when it did the opposite. I have thought often about this, and have concluded that at that moment in time, because I could not utilise the correct explanation (thanks again Mr Fortune) I genuinely believed this to be the case. I had been beaten.
Unsurprisingly, after asking me whether I thought it was a good idea to inform patients that their mouths stank of putrefaction and why I was unwilling to fund my patients' dental treatment, the Committee found me not credible and the rest is history.
I had some explanation initially but soon ran out. I was having to explain why other people, acting with malice, had chosen to behave in the way that they did and I could not. I had an idea what the phrase 'my mind went blank' meant but had never experienced the feeling repeatedly. All the aggression that I had suffered was being directed at me again one hundred fold as if it had happened yesterday, and I had to go back to my hotel, sleep, and do it again the next day. The memory disgusts me, and the thought of my lawyers sitting there watching me having dumped me in it disgusts me even more.
I changed my story in two significant aspects. The first, that I admitted to being rude and sarcastic to the staff, is of little bearing as they had been making my life a misery and I would have been ashamed if I had done anything else. The second, however, haunts me. Mr Cosgrove had the complaints log in front of him and was making me account for the number of complaints (this is some of the evidence that was scored through with alterations and duplications). The two consecutive entries that were proof of the foul collusion in the practice- because they were written in the same (anonymous) hand and contained identical language, the chances of which happening innocently being nought- I admitted to be genuine. All the letters and emails I had written, all the travelling I had done and all the money I had spent came to nothing. For three and a half years I had fought my corner successfully more or less alone, and here I was admitting that the evidence incriminated me when it did the opposite. I have thought often about this, and have concluded that at that moment in time, because I could not utilise the correct explanation (thanks again Mr Fortune) I genuinely believed this to be the case. I had been beaten.
Unsurprisingly, after asking me whether I thought it was a good idea to inform patients that their mouths stank of putrefaction and why I was unwilling to fund my patients' dental treatment, the Committee found me not credible and the rest is history.
Barrister Malcolm Fortune
Why I though that, in a politically motivated case such as this one, a defence barrister would ever behave in a way which threatened his own livelihood I have little idea.
Mr Fortune accepted a fictitious story as true. The repeated and ludicrous accusations of racist conduct should have won me the case, and a small fortune. But I trusted someone I did not know, and it has done for me.
Mr Fortune accepted a fictitious story as true. The repeated and ludicrous accusations of racist conduct should have won me the case, and a small fortune. But I trusted someone I did not know, and it has done for me.
Wednesday 20 July 2011
The Behaviour of the Staff
I write about this here because I am coming to my cross-examination by Mr Cosgrove, and because it is pertinent to the clinical failures which I have not written about at length- there isn't much to say. On starting work at the practice, it became clear that one particular member of staff had it in for me. Her influence was entirely disproportionate because she worked with the most senior dentist in the practice, who wasn't my employer. I had to work in their dental surgery for an hour each week because it was the only one with disabled access. Her, and the member of staff who I previously identified whose relatives kept attending and kept complaining about me, were the cause of my downfall and were so because between them they-
1. Colluded with patients to generate complaints (cf Shropshire County PCT). Even just one or two a month will escalate into a serious problem.
2. Used a dentist's private login while I was absent from the surgery to write on patient's notes that they were to be transferred.
3. Shouted at a dentist while he was trying to treat patients.
4. Lied to the dentist's employer about the most serious matters of conduct, encompassing everything except fraud and indecency eg the fabricated allegations of physical abuse of chidren, and racism.
5. Lengthy and frequent absences from the surgery while the dentist has a full list of patients (pertinent to the clinical failures).
6. Kept a diary which again contained uncorroborated and entirely false allegations.
7. Somebody (I do not know who) informed 'patients' of the most private information supposedly known only to my employer, concerning previous contact with police and mental health issues. (This is one certain example of god knows what malicious gossip they were spreading in the town).
8. Informed my employer, in the public setting of a dental practice, that I had caused serious harm to patients elsewhere in the practice when no such harm had occurred.
9. Initiated a catastrophic loss of trust between my employer and I by means of the behaviour above. My employer kept a paper trail long enough to hang an army, never mind a dentist whose supposed indemnifiers were more interested in preserving their own reputations than in helping me. The malign influence of these two members of staff turned my employer against me, whereupon the other staff, with whom I had had perfectly satisfactory relations for a year, turned as well.
Each one of these behaviours (except the shouting, because I did not keep substantial records and if I had they wouldn't have been believed anyway) can be verified from the evidence, and the PCT were absolutely certain that the staff were behaving in this way.
So why? If the reader thinks that I provoked them into it, please read the 'some philosophical questions' post again. They certainly weren't asked at the PCC. Were DP unable to understand, or did they take my employer's side because he had paid them more money than I had? Was it not understood that the behaviour above was bullying and intimidation of the most foul nature because I am male and the staff female? If I had been of BME background, would DP, Mr Fortune and the GDC have displayed the same bovine incomprehension in relation to this? I have many more questions, but I must state again the consequences for me-1. Loss of job 2. Loss of livelihood 3. Unbelievable stress and heartache over a period of five years now.
1. Colluded with patients to generate complaints (cf Shropshire County PCT). Even just one or two a month will escalate into a serious problem.
2. Used a dentist's private login while I was absent from the surgery to write on patient's notes that they were to be transferred.
3. Shouted at a dentist while he was trying to treat patients.
4. Lied to the dentist's employer about the most serious matters of conduct, encompassing everything except fraud and indecency eg the fabricated allegations of physical abuse of chidren, and racism.
5. Lengthy and frequent absences from the surgery while the dentist has a full list of patients (pertinent to the clinical failures).
6. Kept a diary which again contained uncorroborated and entirely false allegations.
7. Somebody (I do not know who) informed 'patients' of the most private information supposedly known only to my employer, concerning previous contact with police and mental health issues. (This is one certain example of god knows what malicious gossip they were spreading in the town).
8. Informed my employer, in the public setting of a dental practice, that I had caused serious harm to patients elsewhere in the practice when no such harm had occurred.
9. Initiated a catastrophic loss of trust between my employer and I by means of the behaviour above. My employer kept a paper trail long enough to hang an army, never mind a dentist whose supposed indemnifiers were more interested in preserving their own reputations than in helping me. The malign influence of these two members of staff turned my employer against me, whereupon the other staff, with whom I had had perfectly satisfactory relations for a year, turned as well.
Each one of these behaviours (except the shouting, because I did not keep substantial records and if I had they wouldn't have been believed anyway) can be verified from the evidence, and the PCT were absolutely certain that the staff were behaving in this way.
So why? If the reader thinks that I provoked them into it, please read the 'some philosophical questions' post again. They certainly weren't asked at the PCC. Were DP unable to understand, or did they take my employer's side because he had paid them more money than I had? Was it not understood that the behaviour above was bullying and intimidation of the most foul nature because I am male and the staff female? If I had been of BME background, would DP, Mr Fortune and the GDC have displayed the same bovine incomprehension in relation to this? I have many more questions, but I must state again the consequences for me-1. Loss of job 2. Loss of livelihood 3. Unbelievable stress and heartache over a period of five years now.
Tuesday 19 July 2011
General Dental Council Part 8- the Health evidence
We had arranged that a consultant psychiatrist attend to try to explain why I had behaved in the way that I had. This again stemmed from my team's dismal inability to understand what had occurred. The conduct could be narrowed down to- breaking wind and burping, flicking the V's, swearing and making negative comments about people. The false connection which the prosecution made largely unchallenged was that the patients had been affected by any of this. The one behaviour- the wallet-opening- which the patients must have been aware of was mentioned in one line of documentation from Green End, despite the scrutiny I was under and the huge volume of contemporaneous observations kept by Mr Holgate. The patients were presented as a mass of sufferers adversely affected by this behaviour and yet not one testified to it (plus it was virtually absent from the written complaints- I can remember one complaint which mentioned that I had burped). So we had a group of staff saying that they had observed inappropriate behaviour in respect of patients, yet the two other people in the room at the time- the patient and I- did not confirm any of it. Madness.
The problem with the Health evidence was that I was damned if I used it and damned if I didn't. The particular problem with using it was that my alcohol use and 'recreational activities' (which had ceased six years previously), which I had successfully concealed from the GDC for twelve years, were voluntarily and in detailed form revealed and this particular evidence did not go down well at all.
The problem with the Health evidence was that I was damned if I used it and damned if I didn't. The particular problem with using it was that my alcohol use and 'recreational activities' (which had ceased six years previously), which I had successfully concealed from the GDC for twelve years, were voluntarily and in detailed form revealed and this particular evidence did not go down well at all.
General Dental Council Part 7-the PCC and the Legal Adviser
Among other gems, the Committee Chairwoman Valerie Paterson contrived to attend work in a blouse which was unironed and, while questioning an expert witness, to get his name wrong four times in an hour while reading it from a piece of paper in front of her. Only one member of the Committee ever showed the vaguest signs of engaging with the process in front of him.
In his advice, the 'independent' Legal Adviser Jeffrey Widdup made no mention of the fact that a small but important part of the evidence against me (the complaints log) had like a child's jotter been scrawled through with alterations after the fact. He stated that the uncorroborated complaints should be treated with less gravity than the complaints supported by witnesses. It looked to me that this concession was as easy for him as passing a kidney stone. These complaints included such deviancies as asking patients to pay their debts and 'being about to' commence procedures without checking medical histories (or, sitting in a chair in a dental surgery). The numerous and self-diagnosing suspicious features of this evidence, the cuntish nature of which I and the PCT understood comprehensively within three minutes, apparently eluded him. So we have gone from complaints which would not normally be admitted and which have been denounced as malicious and vexatious by experts to thirty or forty reasonable people who were entirely justified in their negative opinions of me. What a load of balls, and what a useless crock of shit my lawyers were for letting this happen.
In his advice, the 'independent' Legal Adviser Jeffrey Widdup made no mention of the fact that a small but important part of the evidence against me (the complaints log) had like a child's jotter been scrawled through with alterations after the fact. He stated that the uncorroborated complaints should be treated with less gravity than the complaints supported by witnesses. It looked to me that this concession was as easy for him as passing a kidney stone. These complaints included such deviancies as asking patients to pay their debts and 'being about to' commence procedures without checking medical histories (or, sitting in a chair in a dental surgery). The numerous and self-diagnosing suspicious features of this evidence, the cuntish nature of which I and the PCT understood comprehensively within three minutes, apparently eluded him. So we have gone from complaints which would not normally be admitted and which have been denounced as malicious and vexatious by experts to thirty or forty reasonable people who were entirely justified in their negative opinions of me. What a load of balls, and what a useless crock of shit my lawyers were for letting this happen.
General Dental Council Part 6- the patients
There were three patients who had visited my surgery five times between them. The reason that their allegations were not mentioned in the media was because the charges relating to them derived mostly from-
1. My manner
2. My tone of voice
3. The expression on my face
4. Administering an injection which they found painful
5. Me saying something more than once
amongst one or two other things equally impossible to disprove. It looked very much to me that they were there for the sole reason that they had agreed to testify, because in clinical terms they described nothing other than entirely routine dental operations.
1. My manner
2. My tone of voice
3. The expression on my face
4. Administering an injection which they found painful
5. Me saying something more than once
amongst one or two other things equally impossible to disprove. It looked very much to me that they were there for the sole reason that they had agreed to testify, because in clinical terms they described nothing other than entirely routine dental operations.
couple of other things
My performance at the Health Committee was universally commended by those who were there or who read the transcript.
The PCT have taken me off their performers list. This is an administrative action rather than a punitive one, but they are not obliged to let me back on it and I am certain they won't.
The PCT have taken me off their performers list. This is an administrative action rather than a punitive one, but they are not obliged to let me back on it and I am certain they won't.
Monday 18 July 2011
Professional Conduct Hearing Part 5- the media
There has been a journalist in the chamber taking notes. On the evening of the third (?) day, I see the Daily Mail has put the story online. The next day I am in all the tabloids, all the middle markets and some of the broadsheets. I learn later that my local newspaper has written about me every day of the hearing. Clearly their readers have never farted at work, sworn at work or made negative comments about others. Getting on a tube carriage and seeing Metros strewn around containing my photo is not an experience I wish to repeat. I was unaware I had been photographed.
Very glad I can walk to proceedings.
Very glad I can walk to proceedings.
General Dental Council Part 4- the liar dentist Chris Holgate
Not a great deal to write about here though I'm sure I'll think of something. It was difficult to portray my previous employer as much other than a well meaning guy who did his best under the circumstances.
His actions in referring me to the PCT and to the GDC had serious and permanent negative consequences for me and he denied both these actions.
In respect of the GDC, I can just about imagine that he had forgotten this referral as a long time had passed and he wouldn't have had any response to his letter. But surely the honest answer in respect of this would have been 'I don't remember'? While sitting with a legal team paid nearly £2,000 a day, it was left to me, who was there gratis after more than two years without an income, to identify the document which proved he was lying.
In respect of the PCT, the proof that he was lying about this as well was the transcript which I have previously mentioned ad infinitum, which stated in black and white that Mr Holgate had sent them the bundle. But my lawyers had binned it.
Although Mr Holgate stated that he 'never saw' this widespread and commonplace behaviour which adversely affected dozens of patients and staff, my brief did not think to ask Mr Holgate whether it had at any point crossed his mind that his staff were being less than honest with him ffs.
So far too late I will put just one question that I would have liked asked- 'In April 2007, when you informed the PCT that I was a competent dentist and that the behavior described to you was entirely inconsistent with what you knew of me, but you were receiving reports of racism, unhygienic practice and intimidation, and staff were running around the practice making public allegations of negligence and firing off letters here there and everywhere, to name just a few problems, did it not at any point cross your mind to think 'there must be something else going on here'?'
His actions in referring me to the PCT and to the GDC had serious and permanent negative consequences for me and he denied both these actions.
In respect of the GDC, I can just about imagine that he had forgotten this referral as a long time had passed and he wouldn't have had any response to his letter. But surely the honest answer in respect of this would have been 'I don't remember'? While sitting with a legal team paid nearly £2,000 a day, it was left to me, who was there gratis after more than two years without an income, to identify the document which proved he was lying.
In respect of the PCT, the proof that he was lying about this as well was the transcript which I have previously mentioned ad infinitum, which stated in black and white that Mr Holgate had sent them the bundle. But my lawyers had binned it.
Although Mr Holgate stated that he 'never saw' this widespread and commonplace behaviour which adversely affected dozens of patients and staff, my brief did not think to ask Mr Holgate whether it had at any point crossed his mind that his staff were being less than honest with him ffs.
So far too late I will put just one question that I would have liked asked- 'In April 2007, when you informed the PCT that I was a competent dentist and that the behavior described to you was entirely inconsistent with what you knew of me, but you were receiving reports of racism, unhygienic practice and intimidation, and staff were running around the practice making public allegations of negligence and firing off letters here there and everywhere, to name just a few problems, did it not at any point cross your mind to think 'there must be something else going on here'?'
General Dental Council Part 3
The core of the case is the staff's testimony to my behaviour. There are seven of them (of the nine who were working at the time that I was), and each one of them lies through their teeth. Their testimony derives from the group complaint that they wrote with another dentist in the practice (who is barely mentioned). This complaint had been written after I had alleged that one of them was illicitly transferring patients off my list, and after my behavior had been deteriorating for two or three weeks. Although they formed a group and wrote down their thoughts together, there is no evidence for me or anyone else to say that this was an example of 'group think'. They are not here by choice. Yet again I must mention the PCT's view, which was that the staff's behaviour towards me was pure victimisation, and here they are again.
The main lie that they told was this business with the wallets. Although their original complaint had been a single line alleging that 'I had been known to do this', this has mushroomed into seven people seeing me do it. Like virtually all of the allegations, there are no times, dates, locations nor the identity of one single patient affected by this crass behaviour. Although the Committee is most interested in identifying this information in respect of other allegations, they do not ask a single probing question about this. There are no records of verbal comments from patients, and certainly no complaint in writing objecting to this behaviour which, according to the testimony, must have been widespread and commonplace. I hear that I asked unemployed patients to open their wallets, which is insane but passes unquestioned, but the allegation that I asked people with darker skin than me to do this has disappeared. Like all of the behavioural allegations, this allegation is so vague that it is impossible to disprove- the terms 'deafening silence' (from my employer and 3,000 patients) and 'silent majority' come to mind. Quite obviously the patients must have been aware of this yet there was never at any point a conversation with me that I had been observed doing this. Clearly, that something cannot be disproved yet apparently can be proved to a civil standard poses no ethical quandary for those lawyers who have framed these charges.
The staff finish and it is pretty damning. It seems to me that asking the staff to describe in detail one single incident of wallet-opening would have exposed them as liars (because it never happened) but my brief did not ask.
The main lie that they told was this business with the wallets. Although their original complaint had been a single line alleging that 'I had been known to do this', this has mushroomed into seven people seeing me do it. Like virtually all of the allegations, there are no times, dates, locations nor the identity of one single patient affected by this crass behaviour. Although the Committee is most interested in identifying this information in respect of other allegations, they do not ask a single probing question about this. There are no records of verbal comments from patients, and certainly no complaint in writing objecting to this behaviour which, according to the testimony, must have been widespread and commonplace. I hear that I asked unemployed patients to open their wallets, which is insane but passes unquestioned, but the allegation that I asked people with darker skin than me to do this has disappeared. Like all of the behavioural allegations, this allegation is so vague that it is impossible to disprove- the terms 'deafening silence' (from my employer and 3,000 patients) and 'silent majority' come to mind. Quite obviously the patients must have been aware of this yet there was never at any point a conversation with me that I had been observed doing this. Clearly, that something cannot be disproved yet apparently can be proved to a civil standard poses no ethical quandary for those lawyers who have framed these charges.
The staff finish and it is pretty damning. It seems to me that asking the staff to describe in detail one single incident of wallet-opening would have exposed them as liars (because it never happened) but my brief did not ask.
General Dental Council Part 2
I forgot to write that Capsticks, the GDC's lawyers, made a late application for the uncorroborated patient complaints (ie all of them except 3) to be included in the Committe bundle- it seems that normally they wouldn't be. My lawyers did not oppose this application, so that's at least fifty pages of A4 which make me look bad staring us in the face every time every time we open the folder. The PCT opinions, which rightly describe the same patient complaints as evidence of my innocence, are of course nowhere to be seen. The first page of the bundle is an old letter in which I describe DP as 'useless bastards'- so much for a united front.
While reading the following posts, please remember that I have been judged more harshly than dentists who have knowingly committed serious and extensive fraud both at work and outside it, and than the pathologist whose negligence was an indirect cause of the violent death of a vulnerable woman at the hands of a serial killer. One dentist was convicted for possession of child pornography and had no action taken against him. The dentist who was struck off for the deviant and highly unusual act of having consensual sex in the workplace seems to be more in my boat.
While reading the following posts, please remember that I have been judged more harshly than dentists who have knowingly committed serious and extensive fraud both at work and outside it, and than the pathologist whose negligence was an indirect cause of the violent death of a vulnerable woman at the hands of a serial killer. One dentist was convicted for possession of child pornography and had no action taken against him. The dentist who was struck off for the deviant and highly unusual act of having consensual sex in the workplace seems to be more in my boat.
Sunday 17 July 2011
The General Dental Council
Another £575 to the GDC, and off we go. I am staying in the Euston Travelodge while my team are in four star hotels. I have chosen a hotel within walking distance of the GDC-one of the few wise decisions I have made in relation to this whole thing.
The rest of this blog could take a week to write. I think I'll pause for a bit to order my thoughts.
The rest of this blog could take a week to write. I think I'll pause for a bit to order my thoughts.
romances and finances
Shortly before leaving Green End, a woman asked me to accompany her on holiday to South America. She had booked the trip with her boyfriend but they had split up. Not knowing the trouble I was in, she was surprised to hear me say that I did not think I would be able to afford it.
I then went out with various girlfriends for varying amounts of time. Because of my financial situation I could not be serious about them from the beginning, and one said that we could not be together because 'if I was facing what you're facing I would not be able to leave the house'.
I then met someone who I liked a lot. She liked me a lot and we both tried hard, but she was not looking for someone who had no prospects of any sort and who could blame her. Knowing some details of my situation, she said said she would be happy with someone who had just a casual job. Just a month before the hearing she was still keen, but knowing what was around the corner, I was distant. I have not seen her since then.
The money I made from my property sale was not sufficient to buy a new place, and it has been running out quickly ever since.
Of course I should have got a job and I have done some work. It is an exaggeration to say that the dental situation made getting another job impossible but not a huge one. Of the sort of jobs that I was qualified to do, how many would have survived me being on the front page of the local newspaper and Number One on the 'most searched for items' on the BBC news website?
I then went out with various girlfriends for varying amounts of time. Because of my financial situation I could not be serious about them from the beginning, and one said that we could not be together because 'if I was facing what you're facing I would not be able to leave the house'.
I then met someone who I liked a lot. She liked me a lot and we both tried hard, but she was not looking for someone who had no prospects of any sort and who could blame her. Knowing some details of my situation, she said said she would be happy with someone who had just a casual job. Just a month before the hearing she was still keen, but knowing what was around the corner, I was distant. I have not seen her since then.
The money I made from my property sale was not sufficient to buy a new place, and it has been running out quickly ever since.
Of course I should have got a job and I have done some work. It is an exaggeration to say that the dental situation made getting another job impossible but not a huge one. Of the sort of jobs that I was qualified to do, how many would have survived me being on the front page of the local newspaper and Number One on the 'most searched for items' on the BBC news website?
The Dental Protection society Part 3
From March 2010 until January 2011, I make at least half a dozen round trips around England, mainly to Leeds but also to Manchester and Sheffield. My lawyers have decided that 'if you get treated like an arsehole for long enough you'll end up behaving like one' is not a proper explanation-although the PCT privately thought it a perfectly likely scenario- so we are essentially casting around to obtain a credible explanation on grounds of health. The best I can think of DP and Mr Fortune is that their experience taught them that this was the only strategy which might work, though I have thought and do think a lot worse of them. Yet again, I find myself wondering, if they were genuinely unable to understand the expert views of the PCT which were written in standard English, why they did not phone these people who were still working in the legal and dental fields and ask them why they said these things.
The West Midlands Deanery
Another journey, to Birmingham. I take models of my labwork to discuss the issues but Dental Protection have sent me the wrong ones. We discuss extra training but are further constrained by the fact that I do not have a full performer number-making it difficult to access their computerised booking system. Not working further compounds the problem as for the particular course I need to attend, a range of items need to be taken which are only available to practising dentists. Of course having no spare money is of absolutely no assistance in any of this. We are, unsurprisingly, unable to construct a Personal Development Plan.
The Dental Protection society Part 2
This part is tricky to write about objectively and (I would guess) potentially hazardous legally. I will try to keep to generalities though it will be difficult to avoid duplication when I write about the Professional Conduct Hearing.
Readers will remember that by the end of 2009 I had been out of touch with Dental Protection for two years, due to their deliberate sabotage, at a particularly difficult time for me, of my dealings with Shropshire County PCT. Though Dental Protection protested that they meant well, they never explained why it was that after cancelling my meeting with the PCT unilaterally, they did not attempt to schedule another one-the obvious course of action for those who have an interest in an ongoing process and genuinely wish to help. In the meantime I had attended repeated meetings, interviews and hearings with friends, family members, my own solicitor and alone. All of these occasions had passed off with some semblance of civility and co-operation.
So the question is of course-why did I use them? I wish I had a better answer to this than 'I was told to by people I trusted' but that is the only answer I have. Unsurprisingly, having had no income for more than a year, I could either use them or represent myself again, and I was told this wasn't a real option.
So I made the call and the second of many journeys to Leeds in March 2010. I had set off a train of events which would lead increasingly out of my control and what's worse, I had a good idea at the time that this was the case. There were two strands to the case-my behaviour and substandard clinical practice. I again tried to explain that I had been the victim of a group leading to inappropriate behaviour and poor performance and again this was not accepted, despite the wealth of evidence to prove the gangsterish mentality prevalent in the area at the time and the detailed analysis provided by the PCT which explained how this evidence proved this. Little was decided at this meeting on strategy. I was advised to make contact with the West Midlands Deanery for Postgraduate Education for Health Professionals or whatever it's called.
Readers will remember that by the end of 2009 I had been out of touch with Dental Protection for two years, due to their deliberate sabotage, at a particularly difficult time for me, of my dealings with Shropshire County PCT. Though Dental Protection protested that they meant well, they never explained why it was that after cancelling my meeting with the PCT unilaterally, they did not attempt to schedule another one-the obvious course of action for those who have an interest in an ongoing process and genuinely wish to help. In the meantime I had attended repeated meetings, interviews and hearings with friends, family members, my own solicitor and alone. All of these occasions had passed off with some semblance of civility and co-operation.
So the question is of course-why did I use them? I wish I had a better answer to this than 'I was told to by people I trusted' but that is the only answer I have. Unsurprisingly, having had no income for more than a year, I could either use them or represent myself again, and I was told this wasn't a real option.
So I made the call and the second of many journeys to Leeds in March 2010. I had set off a train of events which would lead increasingly out of my control and what's worse, I had a good idea at the time that this was the case. There were two strands to the case-my behaviour and substandard clinical practice. I again tried to explain that I had been the victim of a group leading to inappropriate behaviour and poor performance and again this was not accepted, despite the wealth of evidence to prove the gangsterish mentality prevalent in the area at the time and the detailed analysis provided by the PCT which explained how this evidence proved this. Little was decided at this meeting on strategy. I was advised to make contact with the West Midlands Deanery for Postgraduate Education for Health Professionals or whatever it's called.
limbo
Several months pass- another £550 to the GDC.
I contact both the Dental Director and the Chairman of the PCT but it is clear that no further help or support will be forthcoming. My hopes rise a little when I see that they are advertising anciliary jobs to which I am eminently well suited but I receive no acknowledgment of my applications.
At some point I receive notification that the Professional Conduct Committee will sit in April 2010.
Bowing to intense family pressure and acting entirely against my instincts, I re-establish contact with Dental Protection.
In March 2010 I am told that the Professional Conduct Committee has been postponed. Since Dental Protection are supposed to be helping me I ask them to contact the GDC and ask them why they are being such bastards but my request is turned down on the grounds that this approach 'would not do any good'.
In July 2010, after several attempts in several months, I succeed in getting the case rescheduled by contacting the GDC Customer Service Number (for patients who are hacked off with them). Their website states that their main purpose is 'to provide a good service to registrants'. It is now clear who they are really acting for. The case is scheduled for February or March or April 2011- I cannot remember exactly what they told me but at some point I opted for the earliest date possible.
I am forced to sell my property that I worked my bollocks off for five years to save for. All of this is having a terrible effect on my mental and physical health.
I contact both the Dental Director and the Chairman of the PCT but it is clear that no further help or support will be forthcoming. My hopes rise a little when I see that they are advertising anciliary jobs to which I am eminently well suited but I receive no acknowledgment of my applications.
At some point I receive notification that the Professional Conduct Committee will sit in April 2010.
Bowing to intense family pressure and acting entirely against my instincts, I re-establish contact with Dental Protection.
In March 2010 I am told that the Professional Conduct Committee has been postponed. Since Dental Protection are supposed to be helping me I ask them to contact the GDC and ask them why they are being such bastards but my request is turned down on the grounds that this approach 'would not do any good'.
In July 2010, after several attempts in several months, I succeed in getting the case rescheduled by contacting the GDC Customer Service Number (for patients who are hacked off with them). Their website states that their main purpose is 'to provide a good service to registrants'. It is now clear who they are really acting for. The case is scheduled for February or March or April 2011- I cannot remember exactly what they told me but at some point I opted for the earliest date possible.
I am forced to sell my property that I worked my bollocks off for five years to save for. All of this is having a terrible effect on my mental and physical health.
The Health Committee
I attend the Health Committee at the General Dental Council in London, accompanied for moral support by a friend and a relative. The Hearing starts at 1.30pm. I deny the allegation of Narcissistic Personality Disorder, a different charge to that of which I was notified months previously.
By this point I am getting heartily sick of the bundle of patient complaints, staff complaints, medical reports, performance reports and PCT documentation being passed 'willy nilly' around Great Britain and used to 'beat me over the head' time and again in multiple different settings, even though most of it is stamped 'private and confidential'. The bundle is somewhere around 200 sides of A4 and, in relation to the complaints-which form the main body of the case and make me look like a total arsehole-the PCT have definitively stated that the evidence has, in the largest part, been generated as the product of a co-ordinated plot. Writing these words, I again find it difficult to believe that two staff members and twenty or so 'patients' have succeeded in derailing my life in this way.
True to form, the GDC's solicitor begins by reading out the most egregious examples of my alleged conduct, which allegations are two years old and presented at third or fourth hand. I object on the grounds that some of them never occurred. The psychiatrists are examined by the GDC and I cross-examine them. I am given time to say what I need to and I present the PCT's findings as independent corroboration of my position-the first and last chance I will get to do this. The GDC solicitor is asked why she was asked to bring the case but she does not know (she left this job with a good reference soon afterwards). The Committee's Legal Adviser states that 'this case should not have been brought' (the GDC excised this statement from their transcript of the proceedings). Because I am representing myself, the hearing overruns until 7.30. I am 'cleared' of a very rare personality disorder, the very existence of which is not universally accepted by psychiatry, and the case is referred to the Professional Conduct Committee. What a fucking shambles.
I have since been advised that this process may have been a ham fisted attempt to allow me back into the profession discreetly. It certainly did not look this way to me at the time.
I would guess that the Hearing cost the dental profession at least £10,000 all in.
By this point I am getting heartily sick of the bundle of patient complaints, staff complaints, medical reports, performance reports and PCT documentation being passed 'willy nilly' around Great Britain and used to 'beat me over the head' time and again in multiple different settings, even though most of it is stamped 'private and confidential'. The bundle is somewhere around 200 sides of A4 and, in relation to the complaints-which form the main body of the case and make me look like a total arsehole-the PCT have definitively stated that the evidence has, in the largest part, been generated as the product of a co-ordinated plot. Writing these words, I again find it difficult to believe that two staff members and twenty or so 'patients' have succeeded in derailing my life in this way.
True to form, the GDC's solicitor begins by reading out the most egregious examples of my alleged conduct, which allegations are two years old and presented at third or fourth hand. I object on the grounds that some of them never occurred. The psychiatrists are examined by the GDC and I cross-examine them. I am given time to say what I need to and I present the PCT's findings as independent corroboration of my position-the first and last chance I will get to do this. The GDC solicitor is asked why she was asked to bring the case but she does not know (she left this job with a good reference soon afterwards). The Committee's Legal Adviser states that 'this case should not have been brought' (the GDC excised this statement from their transcript of the proceedings). Because I am representing myself, the hearing overruns until 7.30. I am 'cleared' of a very rare personality disorder, the very existence of which is not universally accepted by psychiatry, and the case is referred to the Professional Conduct Committee. What a fucking shambles.
I have since been advised that this process may have been a ham fisted attempt to allow me back into the profession discreetly. It certainly did not look this way to me at the time.
I would guess that the Hearing cost the dental profession at least £10,000 all in.
The Health process
In the New Year, I am given a date in April for the Health Committee. I have not been given a substantial reason for the Health referral. One of the members of the Investigating Committee is a Lady so I don't suppose she even has to wipe her own backside never mind ever explain anything to anyone. I attempt to obtain clarification from the GDCs solicitor about this. She replies only to my first email, after which reply the hearing is postponed until July. This leaves me with the prospect of no income for a period of eight months. Because I have not been given a real reason for the request, I refuse permission to the GDCs psychiatrists to view my medical records. This whole business seems very odd to me. I feel like a dissident who, having been defined as an undesirable for political reasons, has his life turned over in order to find justification for this view, a process I have undergone several times already at practice level and, to a lesser extent, PCT level. I grant permission to be interviewed by two psychiatrists, and for drug and alcohol testing.
The psychiatrists attend my residence and each interviews me for an hour or so. They do not take samples for analysis. A week or so later, I receive their reports. Each one has independently diagnosed me with Narcissistic Personality Disorder and recommended medical supervision on any return to work.
Around this period, Dental Protection contact me to offer their help but I decline it.
The psychiatrists attend my residence and each interviews me for an hour or so. They do not take samples for analysis. A week or so later, I receive their reports. Each one has independently diagnosed me with Narcissistic Personality Disorder and recommended medical supervision on any return to work.
Around this period, Dental Protection contact me to offer their help but I decline it.
The PCT again
The Dental Director of the PCT phones and invites me to a mock job interview. Candidates are being interviewed for a dental job-I don't know which-and I am added to the list. Seems like a good way of doing things, although I receive the phone call at 5.30 the day before the morning interview. The Director indicates that he is perfectly capable of understanding why I would ask a particular question at work, which question would be made much of at a later date.
The mock job interview goes OK. We discuss the conditions imposed on my local license. Again, I am struck by the fact that some of the PCT workers are able to understand aspects of my previous work situation which my employer did not and still, apparently, does not.
1. The Dental Director decided, before meeting me, that it was a bad thing that I left the practice.
2. When I explain that serious problems were caused for me by the other dentists' refusal to see any new patients, the atmosphere in the room changes-you can hear a pin drop.
I explain that I am seeing the GDC at some unknown point in the future, and we have to leave things there.
The mock job interview goes OK. We discuss the conditions imposed on my local license. Again, I am struck by the fact that some of the PCT workers are able to understand aspects of my previous work situation which my employer did not and still, apparently, does not.
1. The Dental Director decided, before meeting me, that it was a bad thing that I left the practice.
2. When I explain that serious problems were caused for me by the other dentists' refusal to see any new patients, the atmosphere in the room changes-you can hear a pin drop.
I explain that I am seeing the GDC at some unknown point in the future, and we have to leave things there.
The GDC
First communication from the GDC. A caseworker has anlysed the paperwork, and referred the case up the chain to the Investigating Committee on conduct grounds. His analysis contains seven factual errors. The Investigating Committee has referred me to a Fitness to Practice Committee, the Health Committee, because 'issues may suggest health condition'. I do not remember receiving a timescale for the Health process at this point.
recap
It is near the end of 2008. To clarify, the PCT had the option of removing my performer number altogether, making it almost impossible to get work anywhere.
My income from the PCT has now stopped.
I have paid Dental Protection £9,000 over an eight year career.
The solicitor I used at the PCT cost £2,000.
My next GDC annual retention fee is due, the second since they received the 'evidence'. I think this would have been around £520 at this time.
My income from the PCT has now stopped.
I have paid Dental Protection £9,000 over an eight year career.
The solicitor I used at the PCT cost £2,000.
My next GDC annual retention fee is due, the second since they received the 'evidence'. I think this would have been around £520 at this time.
Saturday 16 July 2011
Some philosophical questions
Does a high level of complaints justify support staff changing their behaviour at work?
If it does, how do we explain that most of the staff I worked with did not, for a year or so, behave in the disgusting ways that a small minority did, and some of them never did change their behaviour?
Does it explain why this minority behaved in this way from the first day that I arrived at the practice?
If a dentist is generating a genuinely high level of discontent in a town, how is it that the dentist's patient throughput and income rise month after month after month?
If one patient is accommodated differently as a result of complaining about me, what is to stop other patients deciding to attend with exactly this purpose in mind?
If patients were being accommodated with their dentist of choice while I worked at the practice, why did my employer state that I might start to miss my quotas if they were accommodated in this way?
If it does, how do we explain that most of the staff I worked with did not, for a year or so, behave in the disgusting ways that a small minority did, and some of them never did change their behaviour?
Does it explain why this minority behaved in this way from the first day that I arrived at the practice?
If a dentist is generating a genuinely high level of discontent in a town, how is it that the dentist's patient throughput and income rise month after month after month?
If one patient is accommodated differently as a result of complaining about me, what is to stop other patients deciding to attend with exactly this purpose in mind?
If patients were being accommodated with their dentist of choice while I worked at the practice, why did my employer state that I might start to miss my quotas if they were accommodated in this way?
PCT hearing
My solicitor has been focussed on achieving the best outcome for me and sets about this tenaciously. There is no point in arguing for the PCT to take no action, so he tries to ameliorate the extent of the conditions they propose to impose; in this he succeeds. However, as expected, my length of time off work is used against me by way of the imposition of a new condition relating to a Keeping In Touch Scheme.
Four hours later, the hearing is finished. But will the PCT help me get a job by which I can comply with the conditions?
Four hours later, the hearing is finished. But will the PCT help me get a job by which I can comply with the conditions?
PCT meeting and decision
I attend the meeting with a relative. We discuss some of the patient complaints and I make a brief statement in relation to engagement and rehabilitation. I admit to the failings regarding crowns which the PCT have become aware of. The abnormal behaviour of the staff in relation to me is discussed-this is the first and last time this issue is acknowledged to my face. I remain unaware that the PCT has received advice which explicitly states that this behaviour was serious and extensive. The PCT has a fairly narrow remit limited to fraud and inefficiency so my conduct is not discussed at length.
The PCT decide to provisionally reinstate my number with conditions of further training and supervision-'contingent removal' of the number. Another hearing is required for this-more adversarial proceedings.
I hire a Shrewsbury solicitor to represent me at the hearing.
The PCT decide to provisionally reinstate my number with conditions of further training and supervision-'contingent removal' of the number. Another hearing is required for this-more adversarial proceedings.
I hire a Shrewsbury solicitor to represent me at the hearing.
suspension part 2
A month before the suspension is due to end, I receive from the PCT a copy of an application (to the Family Health Service Authority, whatever that is) for the suspension to be extended by two months, because of various delays. Nine months after doing any significant work, I am frankly past caring and take the money instead of contesting the appeal, which would involve a journey to Harrogate. Any hearing to reinstate my number will now take place nearly a year after leaving the Whitchurch practice, not long before Christmas. After this extension is granted, the PCT contact me to arrange a meeting to discuss what occurred at Green End.
suspension
I am called to a PCT hearing 'to consider suspending' my inclusion on the performer's list. A performer is a doctor, dentist or optician permitted to carry out NHS work in the PCT area: each performer is given a number for administrative purposes. The number is different to national registration with a professional body, essentially it is a way to be paid money by the PCT in return for agreeing to work to their rules and regulations. As you might expect, initial acceptance to the list and provision of a number is subject to satisfactory completion of application forms and reference and criminal record checks.
As my indemnity society have broken off contact with me and all my money is in property, I am not legally represented at the hearing. The PCT officers are in possession of the bundle sent to them by Mr Holgate; my diary is missing. The expert opinions previously provided to the PCT are also missing, indeed I have no idea at this point that they were obtained, at cost of around £1,000 to the taxpayer, never mind what they are. The hearing lasts two hours and the outcome is never in doubt. I learn that the suspension is paid.
Two days later I receive notification of suspension for six months. No reason is given.
As my indemnity society have broken off contact with me and all my money is in property, I am not legally represented at the hearing. The PCT officers are in possession of the bundle sent to them by Mr Holgate; my diary is missing. The expert opinions previously provided to the PCT are also missing, indeed I have no idea at this point that they were obtained, at cost of around £1,000 to the taxpayer, never mind what they are. The hearing lasts two hours and the outcome is never in doubt. I learn that the suspension is paid.
Two days later I receive notification of suspension for six months. No reason is given.
new year, new job
Another minor miracle-I have obtained a locum job within a driveable distance.
However my employer gets wind of what has been occurring, and I have to leave after one and a half days.
However my employer gets wind of what has been occurring, and I have to leave after one and a half days.
Friday 15 July 2011
The Dental Protection indemnity society
Shortly before I had formally left my job, I made contact with my indemnity society and made them aware of my situation. I went to their Leeds office where we had the first of many meetings. A disciplinary meeting was scheduled at work. The PCT had been in touch with me and a meeting arranged. Understandably, Dental Protection were most concerned about the number of patient complaints. Though I explained the nature of the underhand behaviour that had been occurring, they appeared unable to understand this interpretation, and indeed their incomprehension remains to this day.
Having told my indemnity society that they were not allowed to attend the work disciplinary meeting, I was most surprised, on exiting the practice after this meeting, to see their officer sat in her car outside. She said that she was there to speak on my behalf. What she said to my employer afterwards I have no idea. I left the job after this.
The PCT meeting was arranged for a few weeks after this. Dental Protection's officer was due to attend with me, a morning meeting. At 5.30 the day before, Ms Logan phoned me to say that she had cancelled this meeting and had told the PCT what I thought of their procedures. She did not feel it necessary to explain why she had done this. The meeting was rearranged (or so I thought), but when I attended the PCT the dentists and managers I was expecting to meet were not present-only the medical director. We had a brief discussion about the issues, and I confirmed to her that I was looking for further dental work. I felt that I had been abandoned by those who were supposed to be assisting me.
Having told my indemnity society that they were not allowed to attend the work disciplinary meeting, I was most surprised, on exiting the practice after this meeting, to see their officer sat in her car outside. She said that she was there to speak on my behalf. What she said to my employer afterwards I have no idea. I left the job after this.
The PCT meeting was arranged for a few weeks after this. Dental Protection's officer was due to attend with me, a morning meeting. At 5.30 the day before, Ms Logan phoned me to say that she had cancelled this meeting and had told the PCT what I thought of their procedures. She did not feel it necessary to explain why she had done this. The meeting was rearranged (or so I thought), but when I attended the PCT the dentists and managers I was expecting to meet were not present-only the medical director. We had a brief discussion about the issues, and I confirmed to her that I was looking for further dental work. I felt that I had been abandoned by those who were supposed to be assisting me.
Thursday 14 July 2011
The Shropshire County Primary Care Trust meeting
So by some miracle, I had managed to keep on working at the practice long enough for the PCT to have to hold a meeting about the staff and patient complaints-the same behavioural allegations and 'evidence' which caused me to be erased (they were not aware of the clinical details at this time).
Present at the meeting were -
Amanda Atkin Dental Contracts Manager
Laura Browse Dental Comissioning Manager
Timothy Parsons Dentist
Abhi Pal Dentist
Jeremy Crabb Director of Primary Care Development
Bharti Patel-Smith Complaints Manager
Ms Patel-Smith thought I was to blame. The others thought otherwise.
Mr Parsons thought there had been a 'witch hunt' in the area.
Mr Crabb also thought there was a 'conspiracy' in the area.
Ms Atkin also thought I was being 'treated differently', and that my age and gender may be contributing to this.
Mr Pal thought that the patient complaints were so vague that no-one could know what was supposed to have occurred.
Ms Atkin thought that both my clinical judgment and behaviour must be being negatively affected by the stress I was experiencing.
There was a 'general' discussion regarding the likelihood that the complaints had been generated as a result of collusion between patients and staff.
There were repeated statements that complaints were to be addressed at practice level.
As I write these words I still cannot believe that these things were said but never to my face, even today.
Needless to say the PCT did not divulge this transcript to me. Expert opinion to be used as a defence in a misconduct case? Not according to the Dental Protection indemnity society or barrister Malcolm Fortune.
Present at the meeting were -
Amanda Atkin Dental Contracts Manager
Laura Browse Dental Comissioning Manager
Timothy Parsons Dentist
Abhi Pal Dentist
Jeremy Crabb Director of Primary Care Development
Bharti Patel-Smith Complaints Manager
Ms Patel-Smith thought I was to blame. The others thought otherwise.
Mr Parsons thought there had been a 'witch hunt' in the area.
Mr Crabb also thought there was a 'conspiracy' in the area.
Ms Atkin also thought I was being 'treated differently', and that my age and gender may be contributing to this.
Mr Pal thought that the patient complaints were so vague that no-one could know what was supposed to have occurred.
Ms Atkin thought that both my clinical judgment and behaviour must be being negatively affected by the stress I was experiencing.
There was a 'general' discussion regarding the likelihood that the complaints had been generated as a result of collusion between patients and staff.
There were repeated statements that complaints were to be addressed at practice level.
As I write these words I still cannot believe that these things were said but never to my face, even today.
Needless to say the PCT did not divulge this transcript to me. Expert opinion to be used as a defence in a misconduct case? Not according to the Dental Protection indemnity society or barrister Malcolm Fortune.
final days
The conspiracy was now in full-on mode. I had done my best to please people, but it had not worked. My assistant was now absent from my surgery for ten minutes at a time three or four times a day. Upon realising that she must be keeping a diary, I asked to see it but was refused.
Work had now descended into mortal combat between me and my employer, with the staff working as his army. This was the point at which my manners deteriorated to the extent that I was behaving in the ways with which I was later charged. I was drinking too much and not eating. The staff were now writing down everything I said. Through all of this, my patient throughput only increased. For a lomg time there had been a serious problem with another dentist in the practice and I was dealing with the fallout from this most days. All the dentists were seeing a massive upswing in their complaints and patients were continually transferring between dentists, which had not occurred before.
My last 'normal' day at work consisted of me being the only dentist in the practice, seeing twenty-five patients of mine and five emergencies. All of these patients were desperate to see me and properly dealt with. The staff had stopped speaking to me altogether at this point.
The next day I presented my boss with a diary of my own, which contained an allegation of corrupt practice on the part of one of his staff members. My computer login had been used to write on a patient's records that they were to be transferred to another dentist. This transfer had not been requested by me, the patient nor the other dentist. Though this may not read like a serious matter, it is. It was at this point that the staff got together with a senior dentist and wrote their complaint to the PCT. Although this happened at work while my employer was there, he has maintained that he was unaware that all eight people working in the practice that day, except he and I, spent at least an hour putting this document together. His position that he was unaware of this action is flatly contradicted by the PCTs records and by my own observations at the time.
I was signed off work with stress. I went back to work but was suspended on arrival with no reason given. Another disciplinary meeting was called at which my employer threatened to send all my complaints to the GDC, so I resigned, little knowing that - 1. He had formally complained to the PCT 2. He had referred me to the GDC 3. The PCT had sent the staff and patient complaints to the GDC.
Work had now descended into mortal combat between me and my employer, with the staff working as his army. This was the point at which my manners deteriorated to the extent that I was behaving in the ways with which I was later charged. I was drinking too much and not eating. The staff were now writing down everything I said. Through all of this, my patient throughput only increased. For a lomg time there had been a serious problem with another dentist in the practice and I was dealing with the fallout from this most days. All the dentists were seeing a massive upswing in their complaints and patients were continually transferring between dentists, which had not occurred before.
My last 'normal' day at work consisted of me being the only dentist in the practice, seeing twenty-five patients of mine and five emergencies. All of these patients were desperate to see me and properly dealt with. The staff had stopped speaking to me altogether at this point.
The next day I presented my boss with a diary of my own, which contained an allegation of corrupt practice on the part of one of his staff members. My computer login had been used to write on a patient's records that they were to be transferred to another dentist. This transfer had not been requested by me, the patient nor the other dentist. Though this may not read like a serious matter, it is. It was at this point that the staff got together with a senior dentist and wrote their complaint to the PCT. Although this happened at work while my employer was there, he has maintained that he was unaware that all eight people working in the practice that day, except he and I, spent at least an hour putting this document together. His position that he was unaware of this action is flatly contradicted by the PCTs records and by my own observations at the time.
I was signed off work with stress. I went back to work but was suspended on arrival with no reason given. Another disciplinary meeting was called at which my employer threatened to send all my complaints to the GDC, so I resigned, little knowing that - 1. He had formally complained to the PCT 2. He had referred me to the GDC 3. The PCT had sent the staff and patient complaints to the GDC.
Wednesday 13 July 2011
the shit hits the fan part 3
Now things were getting serious. Unknown to me, my dental nurse started keeping a diary. Within two months, I was accused of pushing children about and told that my failure to write up a set of notes within twenty minutes of the patient leaving was a breach of GDC regulations.
Of course the reader will ask why I carried on going to work in a place where such madness occurred. I suppose it was mainly obstinacy plus the fact that getting another general practice job would have been next to impossible.
It was clear my boss wanted me to leave. I have thought often of how quickly he changed his mind from forgiveness to utter implacable opposition.
Of course the reader will ask why I carried on going to work in a place where such madness occurred. I suppose it was mainly obstinacy plus the fact that getting another general practice job would have been next to impossible.
It was clear my boss wanted me to leave. I have thought often of how quickly he changed his mind from forgiveness to utter implacable opposition.
the shit hits the fan part 2
I made grovelling representations to my boss, who decided to let me stay in the job. He thought he was being kind and he was being kind, but his dismal inability to understand what was occurring remained. The main cause of the problems- the organised campaign of hatred which, at heart, only involved one or two staff members and their accomplices in the town- remained intact. My boss did not understand it and if he had he could not have stopped it-the power dynamics in the practice left him unable to. Of course any admission on his part that his staff were behaving in this way would have left him open to vicious neverending litigation of the sort to which I have been subjected.
I wonder if readers are able to understand just how easy it is, for those inclined, to generate a high volume of complaints against a professional working in a public position.
If this sounds like an unlikely excuse, stay with me until I transcribe the expert opinions of the PCT.
I wonder if readers are able to understand just how easy it is, for those inclined, to generate a high volume of complaints against a professional working in a public position.
If this sounds like an unlikely excuse, stay with me until I transcribe the expert opinions of the PCT.
Tuesday 12 July 2011
the shit hits the fan
In March 2007, things started going downhill rapidly. Though difficult to narrate succinctly, I remember it all too clearly.
I was accused of racism, unhygienic practice and intimidating elderly patients, amongst other things. In direct contravention of guidelines from the National Institute of Clinical Excellence, my employer did not inform me of several of these allegations, and indeed they never have been put to my face. My employer informed the Primary Care Trust (PCT) that I was discriminating against my patients based on their skin colour. What caused him to do this I do not know to this day. Indeed in the same email he wrote that this behaviour was 'very strange' that I 'had no need to do it' and that it was 'not in keeping' with the person (me) he knew. Apparently it never crossed his mind to check for corroboration of any of these allegations, nor to doubt their veracity for one minute.
A disciplinary meeting was called, at which I was unable to speak due to the presence of another dentist from the practice who lost his temper. I was issued with a disciplinary warning, which contained no reason for its issue.
When I look back now, I would like to ask Mr Holgate - with all these outlandish allegations absent of any corroboration at all, doctored evidence, relatives of staff complaining etc and your own stated view that this behaviour seemed unlike me, did it not at any point cross your mind that there may be an alternative explanation for why you were being told these things? Particularly, in view of the fact that there had been an incident of group bullying in your practice previously, did it not cross your mind that something similar was occurring?
I was accused of racism, unhygienic practice and intimidating elderly patients, amongst other things. In direct contravention of guidelines from the National Institute of Clinical Excellence, my employer did not inform me of several of these allegations, and indeed they never have been put to my face. My employer informed the Primary Care Trust (PCT) that I was discriminating against my patients based on their skin colour. What caused him to do this I do not know to this day. Indeed in the same email he wrote that this behaviour was 'very strange' that I 'had no need to do it' and that it was 'not in keeping' with the person (me) he knew. Apparently it never crossed his mind to check for corroboration of any of these allegations, nor to doubt their veracity for one minute.
A disciplinary meeting was called, at which I was unable to speak due to the presence of another dentist from the practice who lost his temper. I was issued with a disciplinary warning, which contained no reason for its issue.
When I look back now, I would like to ask Mr Holgate - with all these outlandish allegations absent of any corroboration at all, doctored evidence, relatives of staff complaining etc and your own stated view that this behaviour seemed unlike me, did it not at any point cross your mind that there may be an alternative explanation for why you were being told these things? Particularly, in view of the fact that there had been an incident of group bullying in your practice previously, did it not cross your mind that something similar was occurring?
the pressure builds
During the period recounted so far, I became the subject of two group staff actions in relation to patients of mine.
The first incident concerned a patient who had fainted in the waiting room. He had been awake all night with toothache which painkillers hadn't touched, and had attended the surgery as an emergency when it opened having had no breakfast. He required two upper molars extracted. This was a difficult procedure due to the extensive decay in these teeth. Having seen him between booked in patients and removed the teeth, I asked him to wait in the waiting room for the bleeding to stop, while I saw the next patient. The next thing I knew, the staff had alerted my boss to a problem with the patient and he had seen to the patient.
The second incident concerned an obese patient who was in poor physical health, and had also needed a difficult extraction. Having got through this, she was most upset to be told that this was the first of several surgical extractions planned. She left my surgery, and again I was informed by my boss that he had had to see to her elsewhere in the practice. Again, I had not been informed of any problem with this patient.
Both of these incidents were recorded by my boss as Serious Untoward Incidents, even though they occur every day in one dental surgery or another. In the first incident, my boss had stated to me that the operation had been performed 'better than he could have done it'. It is the commonplace view in the profession that the behaviour of the staff in creating, in public, an impression of serious management problems with patients where none existed is not normal and very upsetting for the dentist involved.
These incidents incurred a catastrophic loss of trust between my employer and I. While contemplating how to fix the relationship, I was stymied by the fact that in relation to both patients, my boss had been able to discard the evidence provided to him by his own eyes in favour of the vindictive and abnormal reporting to him that there was a serious problem with the patients.
Shortly after the second incident, I broke out with guttate psoriasis and a strep throat infection, both, I am certain, stress related.
The first incident concerned a patient who had fainted in the waiting room. He had been awake all night with toothache which painkillers hadn't touched, and had attended the surgery as an emergency when it opened having had no breakfast. He required two upper molars extracted. This was a difficult procedure due to the extensive decay in these teeth. Having seen him between booked in patients and removed the teeth, I asked him to wait in the waiting room for the bleeding to stop, while I saw the next patient. The next thing I knew, the staff had alerted my boss to a problem with the patient and he had seen to the patient.
The second incident concerned an obese patient who was in poor physical health, and had also needed a difficult extraction. Having got through this, she was most upset to be told that this was the first of several surgical extractions planned. She left my surgery, and again I was informed by my boss that he had had to see to her elsewhere in the practice. Again, I had not been informed of any problem with this patient.
Both of these incidents were recorded by my boss as Serious Untoward Incidents, even though they occur every day in one dental surgery or another. In the first incident, my boss had stated to me that the operation had been performed 'better than he could have done it'. It is the commonplace view in the profession that the behaviour of the staff in creating, in public, an impression of serious management problems with patients where none existed is not normal and very upsetting for the dentist involved.
These incidents incurred a catastrophic loss of trust between my employer and I. While contemplating how to fix the relationship, I was stymied by the fact that in relation to both patients, my boss had been able to discard the evidence provided to him by his own eyes in favour of the vindictive and abnormal reporting to him that there was a serious problem with the patients.
Shortly after the second incident, I broke out with guttate psoriasis and a strep throat infection, both, I am certain, stress related.
Monday 11 July 2011
complaints log Part 2
Lo and behold, the log is filling up with written records of verbal complaints. I am never alerted to these complaints when they happen, only shown the log by my boss at regular intervals. They essentially all say that I am rude or some variation on this. In six months, I have received two complaints about my clinical practice, although I am seeing a patient cohort with poor dental health. One of these bears little resemblance to the visit which it describes. Weeks can go by with no entries, then two or three appear in a short period. I am concerned that several of these are from patients who have previously requested another dentist at the practice and been denied access, only to be transferred after they complain. I cannot help but wonder how it will not become common knowledge in the town that patients can now access their preferred dentist in this way.
Although all dentists receive negative comments at the desk, I am the only dentist whose complaints are recorded in this way. The log is littered with very obvious date alterations and double counting (duplications).
Although all dentists receive negative comments at the desk, I am the only dentist whose complaints are recorded in this way. The log is littered with very obvious date alterations and double counting (duplications).
complaints log
I have been working at the dental practice for four months. I am meeting my work quotas and earning good money for myself and for the practice. As a new dentist, my patient dropout rate (those who attend for check-ups and do not return for treatment) is average. As I start work in the New Year, a complaints log is on the reception desk. I have not been consulted about this, and do not know whose idea it was to introduce it. The log can be written in by any dental colleague, member of staff, or patient, but I am not allowed access to it. The forms are titled 'treatment refusal forms' and can be read by anybody in Great Britain, except me.
This looks like real trouble ahead.
This looks like real trouble ahead.
first sign of trouble
A member of staff who I work with frequently has had two close relatives attend my surgery as patients, and both have complained. Her mother was clearly not interested in receiving treatment from me, and has transferred to my boss after saying she wasn't happy with me. Her teeth were heavily nicotine stained and she has now had two scalings at the taxpayer's expense. Within a few weeks, the staff member's cousin also attended my surgery. I knew she would be trouble but I felt I couldn't throw her out-such an action is supposedly unethical although it happens all the time. The cousin had moderately extensive treatment, then disappeared for several weeks leaving treatment unfinished. The next I heard from her was a written complaint, carried into the surgery by the staff member, along with the cheque for payment, which is of course binned. My boss apparently sees nothing untoward in these events, save that they are of my making.
Introduction
My name is Matthew Walton. I still feel a great sense of injustice which gets worse every day.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1359501/Dentist-Matthew-Walton-snob-swore-belched-rude-poor-patients.html
If you think it couldn't happen to you, consider- I had six years training, good references and two and a half thousand people reliant on me for their dental care. I was in a prestigious profession in which support was supposed to be available. I had lawyers 'defending' me for whose services I had paid £200 per month that I was practising.
If after reading this you are as angry as I am, contact Fitness to Practice at the GDC. I am trying to get the case reinvestigated on the basis of the huge number of lies which have been told as they are the only body which may be able to help. They are supposedly publicly accountable, so it would not be inappropriate. No rants, just a brief line saying that you have become aware of the case and some disquieting details- the PCT opinions might be a good example.
http://www.dentinaltubules.com/MattWalton1
Anyone can join website and registration instant.
Please see archive on right.
Barrister Thomas Cosgrove
Barrister Malcolm Fortune
Legal Adviser Jeffrey Widdup
Dental Protection
Shropshire County Primary Care Trust
dentist blog
dental protection society
dental protection indemnity society
general dental council
valerie paterson
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1359501/Dentist-Matthew-Walton-snob-swore-belched-rude-poor-patients.html
If you think it couldn't happen to you, consider- I had six years training, good references and two and a half thousand people reliant on me for their dental care. I was in a prestigious profession in which support was supposed to be available. I had lawyers 'defending' me for whose services I had paid £200 per month that I was practising.
If after reading this you are as angry as I am, contact Fitness to Practice at the GDC. I am trying to get the case reinvestigated on the basis of the huge number of lies which have been told as they are the only body which may be able to help. They are supposedly publicly accountable, so it would not be inappropriate. No rants, just a brief line saying that you have become aware of the case and some disquieting details- the PCT opinions might be a good example.
http://www.dentinaltubules.com/MattWalton1
Anyone can join website and registration instant.
Please see archive on right.
Barrister Thomas Cosgrove
Barrister Malcolm Fortune
Legal Adviser Jeffrey Widdup
Dental Protection
Shropshire County Primary Care Trust
dentist blog
dental protection society
dental protection indemnity society
general dental council
valerie paterson
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)