Southall struck off

[ElenyaTuesday]

See here

Southall

I also object to Southall. Thats not my point.
My point is that this "debate" is not furthered by ignoring the facts, by paranoid characterisation of the medical profession as "evil" or as an "inner circle", by digging up (entirely unrelated) dirt on other doctors -etc etc.
And I continue to say that some of the people posting to this thread are thoroughly enjoying that lovely sanctimonious feeling of kicking someone when they are down and when there is no chance of any comeback. As you say yourself - "I think we are perfectly safe in giving our opinion of a doctor who has been struck off, wrt the area in which he was found at fault". Quite.

For your information I have worked in the NHS for many years with thousands of wonderful doctors & nurses. These same people would be HORRIFIED that one of their colleagues behaved as this man has done.

I am posting as a mother first & as a colleauge second.

I wonder why you found it necessary to name a doctor who has committed the sin of sitting on the same committee as Southall?

Calling him an "evil doctor" doesn't mean I think ALL doctors are, but anyone who defends him must ergo agree with a lot of his views which are evil.

I was trying to answer & discuss Ozy's post about the"'professionals against child abuse' gang who are defending him.

That name was one that came up in association with Southall a great many times but no I shouldn't have posted that as I realized too late. However the rest of my posts still stand.

I am know going to fed my children & calm down a bit before I continue this discussion any further.

Back Later!

Some of us would have loved to have kicked him when he was 'up', and accusing bereaved mothers of murdering their children on zero evidence, of stealing medical records, of colluding with Meadows on the torture of children and parents by splitting up their families, for lying to parents and to other doctors and his many other crimes.
I am delighted that he has been struck off, and find the fact that the medical profession is closing ranks with this appalling man both frightening and shocking. You tell the parents of children who were taken away or killed that they are 'paranoid'.

Meadows is another disgrace to his profession, responsible for endless and ongong suffering.

Take a few minutes to listen to this & make your own mind up

Ok having listended to that interview I'm even more than before!!

He slags off the GMC for allowing an orthopaedic surgeon to be on his tribunal whining that he didn't have "Child Abuse Expertise".

That didn't stop HIM as a paediatrician frequently giving evidence on a psychiatric illness & claiming to be an "expert" a word he used frequently in the interview.

SWC-succinctly put!

Waht is SO worrying is he GENUINELY believes he is right,as many people who are deluded do & because he is eloquent & well educated then of COURSE he must be right!!

As I said before the similarities to Mengele are frightening.

Oh bufo, please don't fall for the 'waah, it's not fair, I'm the victim here' crap spouted by Southall. He, Meadows et al are enormously powerful people who have wielded that power with huge cruelty, displaying a lack of critical thinking, reflective practice or any logic.

The fact that neither has ever apologised for their failures speaks volumes.

I don't know about "self-righteous enjoyment" but I was certainly very pleased when he was struck off. I think he's done a huge amount of damage to families and children (thanks for reminding us about Sally Clark's husband SWC). I've been following this story for five years and have read some of the stories of the families who had the misfortune to be targeted by him. The GMC made the right decision.

bb their defence of using paediatricians to diagnose MSbP, is that MSbP isn't a psychiatric illness according to them, therefore you don't need a specialist in that area to diagnose it (IE a psychiatrist). So a paediatrician can diagnose MSbP because it is solely a series of abusive actions, not a psychiatric condition. As I understand it. (And I may not understand it properly, because it is so ). How they can decide it exists as a "syndrome" and then decide it's nothing to do with psychiatric conditions, is beyond me, but maybe that's just because I'm a layperson who can't be expected to understand what clever doctors say. Or perhaps I'm part of the determined conspiracy to deny that child abuse exists.

Of course you are LB like the rest of us & full of self-righteous enjoyment too !!

Aha.. so he thinks a person with MSbP isn't mentally ill? Like he thinks doctors who experiment on babies aren't either?

I see

I'd like to propose a new form of mental illness: Munchhausen Syndrome by Proxy by Proxy.

It's a syndrome found chiefly among medical professionals, and is characterised by the excessive diagnosis of Munchhausen by Proxy disorder, in the absense of real evidence. MbPD is something of a curiosity, which carries with it an attendant level of attention from the police, media, the legal profession and social services. This causes the sufferer to seek more such attention by repeatedly diagnosing MbPD where little to no evidence exists.

On the basis of the reading a couple of newspaper articles and watching the six'o'clock news coverage surrounding David Southall I hereby propose that he is a classic sufferer of this disorder.

Since I've got an actual qualification psychology (unlike Southall), I expect I'll now be able to get this disorder accepted fairly easily. Once that's done. I'll make a second career from appearing as an expert witness, and giving lectures on MSbPbP. If you're a lawyer or journalist reading this, contact me via Mumsnet. I'm skint, so even just a medium size cheque will do, ta.

Very good Kevlarhead

Hmmm

I think that the storage of secret files on children which other professionals do not know about or have access to is sufficient to amount to gross professional misconduct even without considering the overt child protection elements of his work or the induction of children into clinical trials without the consent of an indicidual with parental responsibility. I'm not surprised at all that he was struck off.

I do think that there should have been a paediatrician with child protection experience on his GMC panel. I think that this would have made the decision to strike him off the medical register more obviously valid and would have made a non-acceptance of this decision even more indicative of his lack of insight.

I also think that it's important not to throw the baby out with the bath water. In all likelihood some of the parents about whom Southall had concerns did harm their children. Similarly I believe that some parents fabricate and induce illness in their children and that this is abusive and should not be ignored.

"I think that the storage of secret files on children which other professionals do not know about or have access to is sufficient to amount to gross professional misconduct"

As well as probably violating the Data Protection and Freedom of Information acts...

and let's not forget that when he got started on his 'I'm the only expert on child protection in the village' crusade Southall wasn't actually a paediatrician. He was a researcher. He had no paediatric qualifications.

In this morning's Times:

www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/leading_article/article3019148.ece

Sums up the issues in a very balanced manner, I think.

MM

I agree MM.

EXACTLY!!

Well done the writer of that article, just what we have all been saying on here about expert witness/social workers etc.

This bit in particular had me cheering!

" But without scrutiny, it will be impossible to know whether doctors, social workers and other professionals are doing their jobs properly. The irony is that greater transparency would probably improve public confidence, because many professionals do an excellent job."

Thanks MM