Harrop MPTS Thread 3

[BoreOfWhabylon]

For when the last one fills up

There are certain Twitter accounts (Ben Huntes being one of them) that are fascinating to read today. The level of twisting and newspeak is just astonishing, knowing what actually happened and what I actually read with my own eyes, I can't believe how it is being framed! How on earth did Hunte ever work at the BBC? Apart from anything else, he seems to be pretty dim!

I am so glad at this outcome. I remember seeing Harrop in full swing back then, and being so incredulous that a doctor was getting away with such behaviour online.

It's nice to see a bit of justice being served.

Victim Support is a top Stonewall Charity. So watch out.

Sorry Bosky, that wasn't aimed at you or anyone else - I'm just so fucking furious about it all I sound grumpy.

And I'm such a slow poster that I crossed with you anyway! I've only just seen your post, though I also worry that Victim Support is bailing out on victims these days

5th story in the Daily Mail this evening: www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10258927/GP-31-called-woman-venomous-transphobic-bigot.html

The screenshots shared on tribunal Tweets clearly state what PPS have said about the Performer's List. The panel have accepted that even a month's suspension is likely to lead to a lot longer for AH to not be able to work as a GP. They have considered this but decided it's a necessary step regardless.

This is a huge, huge, huge blow. I do not know of a professional who would see this sort of sanction as a win of any degree. It is a devastating blow to a career and professional reputation and should absolutely be seen as such.

@LizzieSiddal

Ben Hunte Tweeting that 1 month is a win, oh dear. Mind you he would say that wouldn’t he? He has to deflect away from his Vice interview which was sited as evidence that Harrop had not learning any lessons!

If being found guilty of serious professional misconduct is a win, then I think I'd be happy to see AH embark on a "winning" streak.

Why did the paper call him Dr - isn’t he just plain old Mr now?

Gods help him if he tries omitting this from any future medical job applications or tries to massage / spin the outcome in the UK. Everyone will be aware so there's no chance he could try & sneak it under the radar.

Don't the GMC tell other regulators is they're asked about any doctor's fitness to practise? Does he have to tell all future employers even if they're overseas?

@KittenKong

Why did the paper call him Dr - isn’t he just plain old Mr now?

I think the title goes with the qualification not the registration. Certainly you can be a Dr and not be a physician.

@Lovelyricepudding - yes you can be a PhD and call yourself doctor can't you? Medical doctors can still use the title even after they stop practicing, including being erased by the GMC. As they're only erased in the UK, not all around the world.

GP, 31, who called woman 'a venomous transphobic bigot' and said 'Cis people are just awful' as he used Twitter to abuse people who opposed to his pro-transgender views, has his registration suspended

Says the Daily Mail. Perhaps TRAs would like to contact the editor and explain the meaning of the word 'win'.

@iklboo depends on the country. Some ask the 'home' regulator if the person is of good standing, some don't.

@KittenKong still Dr for another 28 days. Whilst suspended, Dr isn't a protected title, so he can use that. (Although Posie would have a field day, "I didn't know you had a PhD, Mr Harrop", I'm sure). These are the titles he can't use:

www.gmc-uk.org/registration-and-licensing/the-medical-register/a-guide-to-the-medical-register/unregistered-medical-practice

(Scroll down to the bottom)

I can confirm that Adrian Harrop is not appealing.

Indeed.

TurquoiseBaubles 👍

==========

Unless anyone has evidence that Victim Support has discriminated against anyone on the basis of gender critical belief (or failure to believe in gender ideology/identity), I would tend to give them the benefit of the doubt.

I must admit that I misunderstood and thought the info on the Victim Support site was signposting to a service provided by the GMC.

The info on the GMC website also talks about "our" independent support service.

GMC WEBSITE

Witness Support

You can get support from our independent support service at any time during our investigation. For more information please see the witness support guidance section.

To use this service you can ask your point of contact to pass your details to them.

You can also call them directly on 0300 303 3709.

www.gmc-uk.org/concerns/supporting-you-with-your-concern/patient-liaison-service

HOWEVER . . .

MPTS WEBSITE

Get free, independent advice

You can get support from the Independent Support Service. You can use them any time before, during or after a hearing. They’re a confidential, free telephone support service run by Victim Support.

You can talk to them confidentially about how you’re feeling and what to expect. They can also signpost you to specialist support organisations.

To use this service you can call them on 0300 303 3709.

You can find more information on the Independent Support Service website.

(That last bit links back to the Victim Support page that I linked to in my previous post!

www.victimsupport.org.uk/more-us/why-choose-us/specialist-services/gmc-and-nmc-independent-support/)

I don't imagine that the GMC and MPTS would be very amused if the victim support service it was paying for then failed to support witnesses subjected to doxxing and harassment.

Family GP Dr Adrian Harrop, 31, called one person 'venomous transphobic bigot'

He said their aim was to 'demonise trans people and exclude them from public'

The tribunal accepted Dr Harrop, from Liverpool, had been joking in his tweets

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10258927/GP-31-called-woman-venomous-transphobic-bigot.html

"The tribunal accepted Dr Harrop, from Liverpool, "had been joking in his tweets" !!!

If true, I am gobsmacked!!

"Jokingly" calling someone a 'venomous transphobic bigot' ??

"Jokingly" saying their aim was to 'demonise trans people and exclude them from public' ??

Has the word "joke" been redefined now too??

twitter.com/GayGenderPirate/status/1465734004934680577?s=20

That was great. I just wish he had rhymed "job" with "gob" or "mob".

Seriously, thoug. Great song; great delivery.

I don’t think it’ll be long before he fucks up again and hopefully next time gets struck off.

@Motorina

I think from the point of view of his brief it probably is a win. He's whittled down a potentially lengthy suspension into a very short one. That's a successful outcome no doubt.

From Harrop's point of view? Any clinician who thinks being called infront of their regulator, having a misconduct finding, and then a suspension, on their record for life, is in any way a good outcome has a very poor grasp of what it actually means to be a professional. It's not just a job you turn up to. It's bigger than that. For any clinician with any sense of what a privilege it is to have patients trusting you with their care, that's a deeply shameful place to be.

Anyone who works in a profession that is heavily regulated (especially health based) constantly has their regulator at the back of the minds. It's not something that should be taken lightly, the responsibility is huge.

@AlfonsoTheUnrepentant

That was great. I just wish he had rhymed "job" with "gob" or "mob".

Seriously, thoug. Great song; great delivery.

Or knob.

That would work, too!

I think that this is a very interesting result. If posters cast their minds back to the very start of the tribunal hearing on the 15th November, and the live tweeting arising out of that, there was a pervading feeling among many that the GMC was barely making its case.

However the tribunal was listening and reading, and - from the little I've seen so far - effectively made this ruling 'unappealable'.

The (non-medical) quasi-judicial panels on which I've sat always paid keen attention to this element of keeping the final decisions conspicuously fair and tight. No panel wants to be successfully appealed. And I imagine no MPTS panel would want to give AH a whole nine months to build up momentum for yet another hearing on the same matters.

I don't know if the panel called it right. I suspect they leant toward leniency for the safety of the ruling.

I suspect the panel suspects he'll come a cropper anyway. This ruling clears the decks to some extent for 'going forward'.

Got to love the Daily Mail comments.