Harrop MPTS Thread 3

[BoreOfWhabylon]

For when the last one fills up

[quote RoyalCorgi]@Motorina (and anyone else who knows) I realise I am asking this question very very late in the day, but why is a case like this heard by an independent panel rather than by the GMC itself? It seems really weird to me that the GMC as a regulatory body has to persuade another group of people that a member has behaved badly enough to require disciplinary action, rather than being able to make that decision itself.[/quote]
I read about this a few days ago. It was part of reforms to separate out the various functions and powers, so the GMC would bring the case but would no longer then be the ones judging it as well.

I don't know how the profession thinks it's all working out.

[quote RoyalCorgi]@Motorina (and anyone else who knows) I realise I am asking this question very very late in the day, but why is a case like this heard by an independent panel rather than by the GMC itself? It seems really weird to me that the GMC as a regulatory body has to persuade another group of people that a member has behaved badly enough to require disciplinary action, rather than being able to make that decision itself.[/quote]
It's the case across the regulators. Sometimes it's a seperate group of people within the regulator with an information wall between them and the rest of the regulator, and sometimes, as here, it's an entirely seperate group.

It's to allow unbiased, fair decisions to be made by someone who hasn't done the investigation.

Otherwise it woudl be a bit like the police finding you guilty.

Context in Law is everything, GP says. He’s talking about the ‘approach’. Absent of identification as AH as a doctor, none of the considerations are relevant. Chair and GP discussing hypothetical situations.

GP submits that there’s a disparity in treatment between an anonymous doctor and a doctor who identifies himself as one.

No shit.

Absent of identification of AH as a doctor, he'd just be another random voice in the crowd to most people. But he chose to identify himself very publicly as a doctor, and to use that title to lend his voice weight. So, you know, he kind of firmly put himself into the 'it's relevant to his governing body' bucket. If he'd kept his trap shut and just been plain old Adrian, he wouldn't be in this mess.

A bit like some random person advising you to take a handful of paracetamol is dangerous, but most people aren't going to listen to Ken from down the pub when he suggests that. That very well might change when Ken announces he's actually a medical doctor and can confirm it's perfectly safe to do so. Presentation absolutely matters.

(Now having very amusing flashbacks of the interview with Posie and his little strop - 'It's DR Harrop, thank you Mrs Keen-Minshull')

Why argue that if these weren't the specific circumstances it would be different.

He wasn't anonymous
He is a doctor

[quote RoyalCorgi]@Motorina (and anyone else who knows) I realise I am asking this question very very late in the day, but why is a case like this heard by an independent panel rather than by the GMC itself? It seems really weird to me that the GMC as a regulatory body has to persuade another group of people that a member has behaved badly enough to require disciplinary action, rather than being able to make that decision itself.[/quote]
It goes back to changes made after the Shipman trial. GMC can appeal if they think Tribunal has got it wrong though.

@Datun

I thought his counsel was meant to be a high flyer?

He hasn't got great material to work with.

The Adrian Harrop Tribunal
@tribunaltweets
·
8m
Replying to
@tribunaltweets
There is evidence to suggest AH has accepted he ‘got it wrong’. All of this points in the direction of insight, remediation and remidiability [will have to look that up- possibly wrong word]. This isn’t a matter or serious professional misconduct, GP submits.
3
3

The Adrian Harrop Tribunal
@tribunaltweets
·
6m
Context is everything, AH has the right to submit his views as long as they don’t cross the line. GP’s ‘beef’ with the GMC is the investigation wasn’t looked at in context. GP suggesting that a warning for the inappropriate conduct would be the [correct action].
1
3

The Adrian Harrop Tribunal
@tribunaltweets
·
4m
The tribunal will now go into private session. Panel don’t think it’s likely that they’ll have a determination before midday on Monday.
3
2
10

The Adrian Harrop Tribunal
@tribunaltweets
·
2m
GP has a commitment on Wednesday. Panel will try their best to accommodate.

Datun
I thought his counsel was meant to be a high flyer?

He hasn't got great material to work with.

Yes, the thinness of the argument is very surprising. They've had a long time. I would have thought they woild have come up with something a little more credible than blaming everyone else followed by but what if he wasn't a doctor even though he is, and what if he was anonymous even though he isn't.

He made a big deal out of being a doctor.

Telling Posie Parker as a means to show credibility, talking about morning meds kicking in, advising someone else about what to say to their tribunal, suggesting someone has a mental health problem.

I don't understand the argument about well what if he wasn't one.

His defence is trying to gaslight the panel, an approach that seem on the face of it unlikly to do anything except piss them off.

@Datun

If he wasn't a doctor it wouldn't matter? Of course it wouldn't. That's why it's the GMC who has brought this case !

It's all about his fitness to practice as a doctor. What on earth are they talking about??

Seems a strange approach considering the MPTS are considering whether or not he remains a doctor. "Strike him from the register then it won't matter any more!"

I don't know how the profession thinks it's all working out.

With a great deal of disapproval, in general. Particularly those regulators who have lay people on their panel, who will automatically be biased against the poor unfortunate professional, and whose silly little heads won't be able to cope with the evidence.

Which is why it's somewhat amusing to read on here that some perceive 'old boys network' and 'closing ranks'. Because that's the opposite of how the professions feel. The system is generally hated and perceived to be excessively critical and unfair.

As I've said several times, my impression from inside is a bunch of highly capable people trying their hardest to make fair, proportionate decisions based on the evidence.

@Personwithrage

Why argue that if these weren't the specific circumstances it would be different.

He wasn't anonymous
He is a doctor

And he got warned. And warned. And warned.

I think a plank of the defence is also that has been unable to process those warnings and the guidelines given to him because reasons.

Context is everything, AH has the right to submit his views as long as they don’t cross the line. GP’s ‘beef’ with the GMC is the investigation wasn’t looked at in context. GP suggesting that a warning for the inappropriate conduct would be the [correct action].

He's already had two!

Is GP suggesting AH's identity (as a doctor) is irrelevant due to the right to free speech?

I know I am hard of understanding but where was the apology to the witnesses in the article that was referred to?

And what is this orchestrated nature of complaints against the article?

Well, you know, if money was free, then that time I robbed a bank would have been fine, right?

@Personwithrage

Why argue that if these weren't the specific circumstances it would be different.

He wasn't anonymous
He is a doctor

Because he wasnt being that mean. He wasnt really bullying.

Police and twitter didnt act so it wasnt that bad if you look at it from a different view.

Is a doctor bullying if theyre not a doctor? Is it a normal person bullying?

I mean the answer is still yes. He harrassed, intimidated and pushed boundaries by any normal measure. And of course he was a doctor, he loved mentioning it. His profile pics always in scrubs. He has to be held to a different standard.

If he'd kept his trap shut and just been plain old Adrian, he wouldn't be in this mess.

I suspect the problem is, deep down he would hate to be thought of as plain. Not special. Would hurt him to think the world saw him as every day.

It's why he abused his status as a doctor on social media.

E on the first thread we discussed the article at length, so he thinks it's mumsnetters fault that the tribunal know about it

I hope his representative keeps talking about his right to free speech.

Because if the panel believe they couldn't keep him off social media, the answer is much easier about whether or not he could remain a doctor.

@PigeonLittle

I hope his representative keeps talking about his right to free speech.

Because if the panel believe they couldn't keep him off social media, the answer is much easier about whether or not he could remain a doctor.

Yes, if he's got a right to do it because of free speech, then he's not going to stop, is he? Which is the whole point they're trying to find out.

It's all rather damning, to me.

There is evidence to suggest AH has accepted he ‘got it wrong’. All of this points in the direction of insight, remediation and remidiability [will have to look that up- possibly wrong word]. This isn’t a matter or serious professional misconduct, GP submits.

This wording is interesting if accurate.

Pointing in the direction of travel doesn't mean you've reacted you're destination.

It's an admission (by his own barrister) that he isn't there yet.

I wonder if this is about damage limitation?

Because the evidence of remorse/reflection is so thin they can't risk saying "he's all good now" as the response to that is a flat "no", especially re: Vice but also more widely in only recently accepting he was wrong and a very lukewarm endorsement for a colleague who hadn't read his tweets and admitted his remorse was limited to himself.

Are they perhaps hoping that painting him as being on the right path with resonate better with the panel and result in lesser sanctions (assuming misconduct is proven)?

@BoreOfWhabylon

The Adrian Harrop Tribunal ***@tribunaltweets*** · 8m Replying to ***@tribunaltweets*** There is evidence to suggest AH has accepted he ‘got it wrong’. All of this points in the direction of insight, remediation and remidiability [will have to look that up- possibly wrong word]. This isn’t a matter or serious professional misconduct, GP submits. 3 3

The Adrian Harrop Tribunal
@tribunaltweets
·
6m
Context is everything, AH has the right to submit his views as long as they don’t cross the line. GP’s ‘beef’ with the GMC is the investigation wasn’t looked at in context. GP suggesting that a warning for the inappropriate conduct would be the [correct action].
1
3

The Adrian Harrop Tribunal
@tribunaltweets
·
4m
The tribunal will now go into private session. Panel don’t think it’s likely that they’ll have a determination before midday on Monday.
3
2
10

The Adrian Harrop Tribunal
@tribunaltweets
·
2m
GP has a commitment on Wednesday. Panel will try their best to accommodate.

So it's now over until the panel read their determination?

If a doctor tweets to your local police, local council and local press that you are so angry that you present a danger to your children’s welfare, it’s bound to be taken more seriously isn’t it?

And what made you so angry? That’ll be the admission about looking up and identifying your kids and their schools.

@Datun

Context is everything, AH has the right to submit his views as long as they don’t cross the line. GP’s ‘beef’ with the GMC is the investigation wasn’t looked at in context. GP suggesting that a warning for the inappropriate conduct would be the [correct action].

He's already had two!

Quite.

I'd be interested in why this one might possibly work when the previous ones were wholly disregarded.

But then once you've gone for the Scooby Doo defense (I'd have got away with it if it wasn't for those perishing Twitter people/MN/GMN) there really isn't a lot left.

Which is why it's somewhat amusing to read on here that some perceive 'old boys network' and 'closing ranks'. Because that's the opposite of how the professions feel. The system is generally hated and perceived to be excessively critical and unfair.

As I've said several times, my impression from inside is a bunch of highly capable people trying their hardest to make fair, proportionate decisions based on the evidence.

As usual, Motorina is exactly right.

As is pigeon
I suspect the problem is, deep down he would hate to be thought of as plain. Not special. Would hurt him to think the world saw him as every day.

It's why he abused his status as a doctor on social media.