Quote from azhiker96
I tried but was not able to modify the title. Perhaps an admin can edit murder to manslaughter in the title.
Fair enough - good to know it's an error rather than an 'agenda' thing, if you see what I mean.
The comment from the Guardian article that stayed with me was that Dr Bawa-Garba had been 'found guilty in court, but found innocent in doctors' coffee rooms'. Once you've heard that, you realize how much of the commentary on this case is of that nature.
The understaffing issue looms large over this case, but it is less
relevant when you start drilling down into the specifics.
There was a clear pathway for observing, recording and reporting the warning signs of sepsis.
understaffing was the causative issue, you might expect some of those steps to have been missed. They were not. The warning signs of incipient sepsis were detected, recorded, and reported.
(In fact, that recording and reporting formed much of the evidence against Dr Bawa-Garba.)
Once reported, there was a clear policy of treatment escalation - which Dr Bawa-Garba conciously chose
not to follow.
Because of her own conviction - arrived at utterly without foundation - that a DNAR order was in place for Jack Adcock.
To my mind, the issue of understaffing is - at best - tangential to this situation.
"I chose not to order more active treatment based on my own erroneous impression that a DNAR order existed, an impression I took no action to verify, because.... understaffing?"
That doesn't cut it.
It wouldn't matter if they had short staffing, full staffing, or overstaffing.
If the lead clinician tells those staff a DNAR order is in operation and orders palliative treatment only... that's what's happening.
Granted, more staff = more chance of somebody looking to verify the existence of the DNAR.
But - 'we need more staff in order to monitor physicians for clinical error" is kind of a stretch.
As for feeling sorry for doctors working in the NHS... meh.
Any UK doctor could take themselves into private practice tomorrow.
Because the UK has all the same healthcare systems as the the US. Private patients, healthcare insurance plans, private hospitals, etc.
We have the NHS in addition
to those things, not instead
Said doctor would be removing themselves from the security of a salaried position, and taking themselves into the competitive open market.
They're distancing themselves from the vast majority of the patient population, because in Britain, the NHS is Big Dog at the Feed Bowl, but they are availing themselves of the wealthiest patient groups, corporate and commercial work.
Good luck to them.
(In reality, most UK doctors do the majority of their work in the NHS, and do various amounts of private practice as a sideline.)
Hope there's food for thought in there!