Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Original poster

To want MNHQ to get rid of the link to 'I want great care'?

486 replies

sallysparrow157 · 02/09/2011 13:11

It's an awful awful website. It is not moderated or validated. Doctors at times have to do things that patients don't like (ie sectioning someone mentally ill, not prescribing methadone for someone who is still using heroin as some extreme examples but even things like not giving antibiotics for a viral infection or not referring someone to something inappropriate), this doesn't make them bad, in fact it makes them better doctors than someone who will do something they think is wrong just to keep the patients happy. However, anyone who has been annoyed by their doctor can post on this site and write whatever abusive things they like and there is no way for the doctor involved to respond.
It is not kept up to date - there are doctors who have been entered as the wrong speciality, doctors down as still practicing who have retired and doctors who have actually been entered on the site after their own death. Relatives of these doctors have contacted the people who run the site and asked for their details to be removed as it is obviously upsetting to know that anyone who fancies it can write abuse on the internet about your dead father, the people who run the site have not done anything about it.
I am a doctor. I undergo constant monitoring of how I do my job, both the clinical side of things and how I communicate with patients and their families. There is an effective complaints/feedback system so if my patients think I am doing something wrong they have a way of letting me know this so I can improve. So I'm not being precious and not wanting anyone to say horrible things about me. I just think that this website is a good way to spout anonymous hatred online about named professionals, if you are that way inclined, and as it is not updated and contains the details of dead and retired doctors but does not contain the details of many doctors working today (including me and everyone else who works in my department - apparently there are no paediatricians in this city...), it is also completely useless.
I'm very disappointed that mumsnet has chosen to publicise it.

OP posts:
MNHQ
JustineMumsnet · 05/09/2011 13:59

@Thumbwitch

But people on here have said that they have put in complaints about inaccuracies, asked for things to be removed and it hasn't happened - so what is this "moderation" that that site is supposed to be undertaking?

They assured us that they investigate every complaint thoroughly. They said they hadn't received any mails re inaccuracies since Helen MN posted address to complain to...

notcitrus · 05/09/2011 14:02

narkypuffin's idea for GP surgery info is great. One thing that reassured me about my current GP practice is the amount of public info, including a statement that all the GPs are willing to prescribe coils and emergency contraception and none will refuse legal abortion referrals, which I've never seen any other surgery do. The docs seem good too - and I'm probably one of few people that has seen them enough to provide statistically significant feedback!

FWIW in London there may be many GP surgeries, but almost all are full, so they have tiny catchment areas - half a mile is likely to exclude you, and in many cases you have to phone the HA to be assigned to one. I was very lucky with my last GP as I asked local friends who they used - they had some similar medical problems to mine - and managed to convince the surgery to let me in as I lived closer than my friends, despite being out of catchment.

For specialists you're mostly at the mercy of the NHS, or your private insurers who will tell you who they will pay for.

NetworkGuy · 05/09/2011 14:04

So what's going to happen in future 'joint ventures' please Justine/MNHQ ?

Will you consider getting views beforehand or wait for a backlash afterwards ?

I suspect the latter, but do, please, prove me wrong.

Asking because I'd like to see a clear statement from MNHQ that might give us hope this cannot be repeated...

Too many member-requested U-turns and you start to look 'out of touch' (and lose members on the way, through distrust).

MinimallyNarkyPuffin · 05/09/2011 14:09

In many cases (with specialisms) the doctor will do NHS and private work. Sometimes the deciding factor might be equipment! You could see the same doctor at 2 different places, one free, one private, but the doctor might not have access to the latest tech at both places Confused. And believe it or not, sometimes it's the NHS that has the latest gizmo and the private place that doesn't Shock.

FireflyRae · 05/09/2011 14:09

I would take their claims about what emails they send/receive with a kilo or two salt.
When the IWGC site was first demo'd with their (still) crappy database they outright lied about sending out apologies to the families of those affected.
And while their founder removed his listing when he got rude reviews he refused to give other doctors that option.
These are Not Good Folk.

Tee2072 · 05/09/2011 14:10

"They said they hadn't received any mails re inaccuracies since Helen MN posted address to complain to..."

I thinks that because we were all wary of giving them any hits on the site so going back to the site, which is what I would have to do if I had a complaint, in order to refresh my memory, was the last thing I would have done.

Also, what about complaints they've already gotten? Where did those go?

MNHQ
JustineMumsnet · 05/09/2011 14:13

@NetworkGuy

So what's going to happen in future 'joint ventures' please Justine/MNHQ ?

Will you consider getting views beforehand or wait for a backlash afterwards ?

I suspect the latter, but do, please, prove me wrong.

Asking because I'd like to see a clear statement from MNHQ that might give us hope this cannot be repeated...

Too many member-requested U-turns and you start to look 'out of touch' (and lose members on the way, through distrust).

We always consult if we think there's any chance of a backlash. Backlashes, let me tell you, are no fun, NetworkGuy. In this case we simply didn't anticipate one. Quite frankly we wouldn't have embarked on it if we had because it's taken a fair amount of effort to set up and as said there's no financial incentive. And we are quite busy. We don't as a rule consult on things unless we are havering or think they might be controversial or we'd be forever asking you questions: Should we do some style and beauty content/ have Jamie Oliver on/ buy Rich Tea or Shortbread fingers etc? Hands up - we just misread this one. Thankfully it doesn't happen too often and we will try to learn from the error of our ways.

MNHQ
JustineMumsnet · 05/09/2011 14:15

@Tee2072

"They said they hadn't received any mails re inaccuracies since Helen MN posted address to complain to..."

I thinks that because we were all wary of giving them any hits on the site so going back to the site, which is what I would have to do if I had a complaint, in order to refresh my memory, was the last thing I would have done.

Also, what about complaints they've already gotten? Where did those go?

Also said they'd received 450 reviews from Mumsnet link so, assuming that's true, I don't think all were wary.

DiazePam · 05/09/2011 14:15

They are moderated actually - we explored that issue in some detail.

How, please?

I asked them this question 3 years ago and never got an answer. Genuinely interested to know.

Certainly at that time the moderation when they were informed of dead doctors being listed and other inaccuracies didn't seem to exist in any sort of meaningful way.

Unless you reviewed Dr Neil Bacon of course, then it disappeared instantly...

NetworkGuy · 05/09/2011 14:16

Thanks for response.

One other thing has been asked - did you approach iWGC or did iWGC approach you ?

Would bet on the latter (!)

MinimallyNarkyPuffin · 05/09/2011 14:19

It's kind of a compliment that people couldn't believe you'd gotten involved with them really. Once you've put out the fires and soothed your burns. And replaced Tech's charred shed.

MinimallyNarkyPuffin · 05/09/2011 14:20

I may have reviewed Dr Faeces the proctologist Blush

NetworkGuy · 05/09/2011 14:21

PS regarding "forever asking questions" - I think when it comes to endorsing / linking to some other web site, that's in a different league to the other examples you quote. It's an area where your site image can be boosted or tarnished far more and for much longer... so would appear to need greater consideration and transparency.

MNHQ
JustineMumsnet · 05/09/2011 14:25

@NetworkGuy

Thanks for response.

One other thing has been asked - did you approach iWGC or did iWGC approach you ?

Would bet on the latter (!)

Yes it was the latter. And you wouldn't believe the number of partnerships we make/ are approached about. Or maybe you would, I dunno, but suffice to say we won't be consulting on each one.

Empusa · 05/09/2011 14:31

"Also said they'd received 450 reviews from Mumsnet link so, assuming that's true, I don't think all were wary."

Earlier in the thread people were reviewing Dr Hitler, so I wouldn't trust those figures too much either Grin

PacificDogwood · 05/09/2011 14:32

On my, this has moved on Shock!

Thanks for removing the link, Justine.
Nothing to add to what more eloqutent people have said.

NetworkGuy · 05/09/2011 14:32

Justine - "but suffice to say we won't be consulting on each one."

Then I hope you only add a maximum of 1 every 6 months, else you'll possibly have a lot of negative feedback each time !

PacificDogwood · 05/09/2011 14:33

Oh for goodness sake, eloquent, which clearly I am not Blush

NetworkGuy · 05/09/2011 14:35

I didn't even spot it, PD... you do know the brain often corrects typos subconsciously so the reader doesn't even know there was an error, don't you ?

CinnabarRed · 05/09/2011 14:41

Hi Justine

Just a quick post to say that I think you're handling the situtation with grace and dignity. Mea culpa is a perfectly reasonable explanation for how the partnership came about.

Sorry if my earlier posts were a bit rude. I was feeling very frustrated.

One last thing - please, please do make sure that IWGC isn't purporting to be supported by MN or any other such nonsense. I wouldn't put it past them.

LovelyCuppa · 05/09/2011 15:22

I think the way MNHQ have handled this has been brilliant. Many, many businesses would be improved by listening to their users more.

MNHQ
JustineMumsnet · 05/09/2011 15:35

@NetworkGuy

Justine - "but suffice to say we won't be consulting on each one."

Then I hope you only add a maximum of 1 every 6 months, else you'll possibly have a lot of negative feedback each time !

Oh I dunno, one day you might like something [hopeful]

MNHQ
JustineMumsnet · 05/09/2011 15:35

@LovelyCuppa

I think the way MNHQ have handled this has been brilliant. Many, many businesses would be improved by listening to their users more.

Thank you LovelyCuppa - the fiver's in the post.

MNHQ
JustineMumsnet · 05/09/2011 15:36

@CinnabarRed

Hi Justine

Just a quick post to say that I think you're handling the situtation with grace and dignity. Mea culpa is a perfectly reasonable explanation for how the partnership came about.

Sorry if my earlier posts were a bit rude. I was feeling very frustrated.

One last thing - please, please do make sure that IWGC isn't purporting to be supported by MN or any other such nonsense. I wouldn't put it past them.

I'm quite sure they won't Cinnabar and thanks for your kind words Smile.

MNHQ
JustineMumsnet · 05/09/2011 15:37

@Empusa

"Also said they'd received 450 reviews from Mumsnet link so, assuming that's true, I don't think all were wary."

Earlier in the thread people were reviewing Dr Hitler, so I wouldn't trust those figures too much either Grin

No they said they were legit ones - but anyway, we've moved on Smile

Swipe left for the next trending thread