I bet you don't wish to rehash it. You haven't got a leg to stand on!
Yes actually, you have painted a very different picture of the attitudes, priorities and intentions of junior doctors in relation to their strike action and their profession, mamadoc, though I can't be bothered to trawl through various threads to pinpoint all the times you (and others of course) have said:
- the priority for junior doctors wasn't the money, it was never about the money.
- it was primarily about the welfare of patients (due to unsafe shift patterns) and the future of the NHS.
- junior doctor were reasonable, transparent and desperately wanted to negotiate rather than strike, they'd negotiate tomorrow if they were allowed to.
- junior doctors wanted to strike as little as possible and would only do so as a very last resort, in order to achieve a new deal in which patients would be safer.
The strike action was presented to the public as something that was primarily being carried out for the welfare of patients and the NHS. We were repeatedly reassured that doctors were not primarily concerned (if at all) about their pay packet. We were encouraged to support the strike action because junior doctors told Britain they were striking for the people and refusing to budge over issues relating to their safety.
Now we find that the junior doctor leadership of the BMA was freely acknowledging, on an internal level, that things were different. Their priorities, their reasons for striking, their 'non-negotiable' issues were not as put portrayed. Their manipulation of public perception was conscious and deceptive. They privately agreed the real sticking point was Saturday pay but that they needed the moral high ground.
These 'revelations' (which I cannot believe you haven't heard of - google it) have Dr Johann Malawana saying that they had to 'play the political game of always looking reasonable' while 'drawing this [strike] right out'. The former chair of the junior doctor's BMA leadership committee stated that Saturday pay was 'the only real red line' that (rather than patients suffering) '99% of junior doctors told us they were upset about'. Although publicly pretending they were desperate to talk instead of strike, they agreed internally that 'even if they came back tomorrow we'd have nothing to talk about' because Saturday pay wasn't on the agenda for discussion.
So basically junior doctors were prepared to play a political game in which patients and the NHS would suffer through extended strike action until such time as the issue of Saturday pay was addressed to their satisfaction. Junior doctors portrayed themselves as champions of the NHS and completely unconcerned about the Saturday pay issue relative to unsafe shift patterns. In fact, it now seems that shift patterns would have been accepted regardless of the implications for the patients if the price was right.
When one considers that the mantra going through this spring has been 'its not about the money' and 'it's everyone's fight' and 'Jeremy Hunt is a liar', the only thing we can conclusively establish is that everyone was playing games and no one had the moral high ground, including those clutching their stethoscopes on picket lines.
Which is all pretty much the opposite of the impression you and others like you put across mama. So I don't know about your kindly impressions of the stellar job that must have been done for the poor lady who lost her legs. A stellar job might have been done. It might not. If it wasn't, there should be accountability. No one deserves the moral high ground. No one is above having questions asked about their truthfulness and performance. Anyone can make mistakes, be incompetent, and lie.