Support Elsie's Law

PLEASE SIGN THE PETITION ELSIE's LAW

On November 21st 1999 Elsie Devine died at the Gosport War Memorial Hospital her life was shorten without justification or logic. Elsie was not a lone in meeting her fate at the hands of Dr Jane Barton there were many other elderly.

Elsie did not have a incline when she kissed her son good night that she was already on the terminal pathway and that the very next day she would be drugged unconscious and nor did her family. Elsie did not deserve her life to be terminated, let alone without her or her family’s knowledge. Elsie is one in many and this practicing must be stopped.

After 4 Police investigations, an Inquest and a GMC hearing it is clear that Elsie’s life was terminated at the will of one person; the Doctor who saw her as a bed blocker and worthless.We the undersigned petitioned the Prime Minister to create a law that states caring professionals alone do not have the legal right to start a patient on drugs that are included in the Liverpool Care Pathway, without the consent of either the patient or the next of kin.

Drugs used in the Liverpool Care Pathway have been under much speculation. Although an audit of Care of the Dying, by the Marie Curie and the Royal College of Physicians in 2009 found that nearly 4000 terminal patients found the framework to be of high quality, there is no doubt that some patients remain at risk.(Full Audit)) There is room in current practice for elderly, vulnerable patients to be started on the LCP without their or their family’s consent; it is not good enough to assume that in all hospitals, hospices and care homes that conversations will take place and that patients and families will be kept informed. The audit reveals that two thirds of the 3,893 patients whose deaths were assessed needed no continuous infusion of medication, and all by 4% only needed low doses of opiates.

However, there have been cases where patients have been started on high doses of opiates and sedatives via infusion and died prematurely.

We should not have to fight for justice after death; the law should be there to protect us when we are alive.

http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/Elsies-Law/

When the ‘system’ fails who will protect us when we are too vulnerable to protect ourselves. Read the full story here.

"Investigate and Disband the GMC" Says Gosport Campaigner

http://www.doctors4justice.net/2009/10/current-aims-and-objectives.html

Dear Ms Mills,

1. I work for Doctors4Justice, a pressure group with the aims as set above.

2. The case of Dr Jane Barton has exposed the weakness of the General Medical Council once again. I have read your press statement that you plan to read the transcript of her case and consider referral to the High Court.

3. There are many cases of doctors who have done no harm to their patients but have been struck off medical register. Your organization has remained silent in all of those cases. Why?

4. There are doctors who are harassed for many years by the General Medical Council through the process of sham peer reviews, and who are ordered to undergo physical and psychiatric examinations for which there are no indications. I can provide a lot of evidence for that and you know about it too. Why you have done nothing about it?

5. Sanctions not indicated or workable are imposed by the GMC especially on Foreign doctors as a revenge for raising the issues in the interest of their patients and public. As a whistleblower I know all about it. Will you continue to avoid this issue?

6. I won many prizes at school and outside. I worked hard and conscientiously but 15 conditions were imposed by the GMC on my practice making it impossible to find a job only because GMC machine belongs to some doctors and not to others. Do you agree with this statement? Are you aware that there is such a thing as racism, sexism and ageism in NHS? Are you aware that as the result of these prejudices referrals are made to the GMC by the prejudiced doctors, for example? Are you aware that the GMC does not respond for years when requests are made for disclosure of information eg referrals of female doctors for psychiatric examinations?

7. GMC conducts sham peer reviews at the request of NHS medical directors who are racist but GMC fails to deal with doctors whose care of the patients is severely compromised. Dr Jane Barton is just one example of those doctors who seriously fail their patients.

8. Am I correct in saying that government is actually complicit in the elimination of the elderly and mentally ill people by doctors through their acts of commission and omission? These most vulnerable people who no longer pay taxes could be seen as a burden to the society. Do you condone such practices?

9. Similarly, do you approve of the elimination of foreign doctors in order to please local "gangs" ie professionals who are bullies and abuse the legal process by making false allegations to the GMC? Have you ever wondered why nobody is ever punished. What are your policies to deal with mobbing? Do you know what it means?

10. Do you agree with the GMC that their Expert Witnesses who give false evidence and know it should go unpunished contrary to the law and GMC's own Code of Medical Practice?

11. On your website CHRE I found this statement:


The Council for Healthcare Regulatory Excellence promotes the health and well-being of patients and the public in the regulation of health professionals. We scrutinize and oversee the work of the nine regulatory bodies that set standards for training and conduct of health professionals.
We share good practice and knowledge with the regulatory bodies, conduct research, and introduce new ideas about regulation to the sector. We monitor policy in the UK and Europe and advise the four UK government health departments on issues relating to the regulation of health professionals. We are an independent body accountable to the UK Parliament.


12. I also found this statement on CHRE website:
Our mission
We protect the public by:
helping the regulatory bodies to improve their performance
setting and driving up standards for health professions regulation
encouraging greater consistency of regulatory practice and outcomes
shaping future developments in the regulation of health professions.

13. How do you manage to achieve your objectives if, in fact, you never examine consistency of regulatory practice in cases of disadvantaged doctors who are dealt with in a draconian fashion. As far as I know CHRE always refuses to look at the cases of excellent doctors who are treated badly by the GMC and CHRE is only interested if punishment is not severe enough. If the sanctions are imposed on a doctor who subsequently cannot work and patients die because of the lack of medical care CHRE does absolutely nothing.

As CHRE does nothing to protect excellent doctors would it be fair to say it is merely an extension of the government keen to deal with what is considered dangerous decision by GMC in one case but not in the other and contrary to your objective to have the consistency in the regulatory body decision making? How can you decide what is consistent and what is not if you do not examine it?

14. This email has been copied to the Human Rights Advisory Committee at United Nations because of the violations of the Human Rights both by the GMC and your organization.


Kind regards,

Dr Helen Bright
Doctors4Justice.net

Norman Lamb MP Calls for Public Inquiry into Gosport Memorial Hospital

Norman Lamb MP of the Liberal Democrats has called for a Public Inquiry into the sham treatment received by the victims and their relatives of Gosport Memorial Hospital. Jane Barton's future should be sealed by the General Medical Council. 51 days later, the General Medical Council are still deciding on what to do. Public interest appears to be balanced between the dead and the pitiful defences put forward by Dr Jane Barton's barrister Mr Langdale. There should not be any problem with striking Jane Barton off the Register due to the example set by the GMC . These are the examples.

1. GMC v Gopakumar - An innocent doctor struck off due to inappropriate examination of a patient".
2. GMC v Varma - Junior doctor struck off one year after qualification for minor application form problems during a time he wasn't even registered with the GMC.
3. GMC v Satya - Junior doctor struck off one year after qualification for a minor issue with his UCAS form.
4. GMC v Vaidya - Consultant struck off due to "attitudinal problem". No patient concerns.


These are just a few minor issues that have engaged the striking off process. In each of the above cases, the GMC took a few days to decide. They had absolutely no problems in striking off the above doctors. In the meantime, Dr Jane Barton has enjoyed a lax interim sanction despite effecting the end of many lives.

Will Dr Jane Barton be struck off?

We are now approaching the General Medical Council’s decision-making day on Dr Jane Barton… that is if anyone thinks they are capable of making a decision on this case? It certainly has been proven to be a very difficult task for the GMC; pushing paperwork round their establishment for some 12 years trying to justify how Dr Jane Barton can be allowed to practice.

It is very difficult for the public to understand how their system works. When you see good doctors struck off for “whistle blowing” – FACT! A number of people have ended up having to turn to the GMC with their complaints only to be let down time and time and time again.

Their code of practice is “Guiding Doctors-Protecting Patients” yet it appears to me that the GMC have not quite grasped the meaning of this. It is also extraordinary that the “Council for Healthcare Regulatory Excellence” (CHRE), that investigate into complaints have not started a serious investigation of their own? There again, those who have been through all these Government/Bodies will understand that it is like trying to tumble down the walls of Jericho and that is why probably some Doctors can, and do get away with Murder - in this case it appears with the assistance of our Health Service (NHS). I feel sure that if these alleged murders ,which could well go into the 100’s at the hands of Dr Barton were in a private establishment, then she would already be in prison.

Dr Barton has been called a Monster on National Television, hearing and seeing her at both the Inquest and GMC; I can understand where the families are coming from. This is a woman who has no conscience, she appears unstoppable and an untreatable predator. It is chilling to listen to her arrogant replies to anyone’s questions regarding her reasoning behind the overdoses of Morphine.

It is also concerning that the Barristers for Dr Jane Barton, Mr Langsdale QC and Mr Jenkins, turn to Dr Karol Sikora to ‘defend’ her. Dr Karol Sikora is a doctor specialising in Cancer patients, - ONLY ONE of these patients had cancer. Dr Karol Sikora, the same Doctor ‘hired’ to examine the “Lockerbie Bomber’s” state of health; the criminal whom he said had only weeks to live. Not surprisingly he lives on.

Dr Sikora considers that the morphine given in these cases was a small dose. Never mind that these patients were not in pain, terminally ill, and nor were they opiate tolerant. Mr Langsdale never considered asking those questions while trying to strengthen Dr Jane Barton’s defence. I would be very concerned under Dr Karol Sikora’s care if he considers the amount of Diamorphine given to these patients was a small dose. What amount of diamorphine will Dr Karol Sikora administer to his cancer patients if this dose is small? Very frightening indeed so all be careful under his care!

Brave nurses blew the whistle in 1991 on Dr Barton’s alleged killing of patients with morphine through Portable syringe drivers. Syringe drivers that she introduced when she took up her new post at Redclyffe Annex and Northcott House. The nurses were subjected to endless meetings with the attendance of Dr Jane Barton and made to feel like trouble makers and bullied into either leaving their posts or remaining silent.

What chance did they have to stop her practices and why was this allowed to happen and why was it allowed to continue? I think we all have to ask Mr Max Millett the Chief Executive of the Portsmouth Healthcare Trust for the answer to this! One year’s worth of meetings, letters and concerns continued from February 1991 until January 1992, all those letters and minutes landed on the desk of the Chief Executive Mr Max Millett but did he deal with it? No, he put it in the shredder and awaited his golden handshake. As he/they been made accountable? No! He/they received a big payout in 2002 along with Tony Horne and Ian Piper who were also aware of Dr Jane Barton’s regime.

No doubt whatsoever the GMC decide, there will be no remorse from Dr Jane Barton. No apology to the families from her for their loved ones who were put to sleep worse than animals without justification or knowledge that they would not speak to their loved ones again. Her smiles and laughter at the GMC tell you all you need to know about this woman! When the chairman at the GMC said that her actions caused severe respiratory depression, and premature death, she did not hang her head in shame, she turned to her dedicated husband Tim an Ex Naval Doctor and they smiled at each other…. No doubt Dr Tim will be by her side at the GMC for the verdict, or will they hide at home like they did at the Inquest?

How much more will these families have to endure to see justice?

They have had a shambles of an Inquest at great cost to the taxpayer where the Coroner Mr Bradley refused the jury sight of all the evidence and allowed witnesses to clearly perjure themselves on the stand without question. Mr Bradley will not release the transcripts; he thinks he owns them, for the time being that is.

Let us look at what Dr Jane Barton has so far cost the taxpayer as this government continues to try and cover–up her malpractices:

1. 3 Police Investigations
2. Commission of Health Improvement (CHI) commissioned by Sir Liam Donaldson
3. Professor Richard Baker commissioned by Sir Liam Donaldson to do an Audit on the deaths at the Gosport war Memorial Hospital, that report Sir Liam Donaldson will not release.
4. An Inquest of 10 deaths at Portsmouth Magistrates Court
Now we all wait in anticipation for the General Medical Council!

BUT most of all we all wait on the CPS and Mr David Perry Q.C. to put Dr Jane Barton in a criminal court. Or is the Government machine going to stop it for a third time – after all, they’ve had the opportunity to prosecute twice before.

Rest assure JUSTICE will be done.

J Marples