UK - Nurse Lucy Letby, murder of babies, 7 Guilty of murder verdicts; 8 Guilty of attempted murder; 2 Not Guilty of attempted; 5 hung re attempted #37

[Ruthbullock]

I actually posted whistleblowing guidelines for Worcestershire trust earlier in this thread (and all trusts are similar) it is quite literally in the policy that you are expected to escalate up through the directorate to medical director to chief exec before going to external agencies, there really is no drama or word behaviour here. IMO we should not be questioning the doctors, who did whistleblow, who did escalate, who did go to management, who did go to the regional leads about deaths…and ask why management did not act on these concerns.

Here is whistleblowing document for Worcs again. Page 10 of 22, about external contact.

I am certain that whistleblowing guidelines will be reviewed in view of this enquiry, IMO.

It is without a shadow of a doubt to me that any functioning board would submit concerns about a murderer to the police.

https://www.worcsacute.nhs.uk/documents/our-trust/whistleblowing-raising-concerns-policy-and-procedure/?layout=file

I completely understand the restraint with jumping straight to the police- I’m curious what logical reason they may have had for not getting the union involved, until a parent (not LL threatened to report a doctor to the GMC) and why they didn’t go to the trusts own safe guarding board until spring 2017.
ETA- everyone who has worked is aware there are official ways to do things, but if you aren’t listened to there will be documented unofficial ways of escalating something of this importance your union rep being the first port of call

 

[Furore]

I completely understand the restraint with jumping straight to the police- I’m curious what logical reason they may have had for not getting the union involved, until a parent (not LL threatened to report a doctor to the GMC) and why they didn’t go to the trusts own safe guarding board until spring 2017.
ETA- everyone who has worked is aware there are official ways to do things, but if you aren’t listened to there will be documented unofficial ways of escalating something of this importance your union rep being the first port of call

Hmm I’m speculating here but tbh I feel if trust were investigating- and Letby was removed from clinical duties whilst this happened - slowly - there would be little requirement for union involvement, as to all intents and purposes, the immediate threat is revoked, and the appropriate investigations are underway. I think the trigger for the spring 2017 involvement is actually that managers wanted letby reinstated and this is where the medics felt enough was enough, there was an immediate threat and management weren’t listening. I can’t see why one would need one’s union rep before that, I would have thought it fairly standard to involve one for a complaint of any stature though?

Curious as to your thoughts on what the managers should have done though?

 

[mrC]

so if the doctors were allready been reported to the gmc by the parents they had a very good reason to want to shift the blame unto somone else

 

[magikarpmagikarp]

So Dr J and his colleagues first went to the safeguarding board in spring 2017- why not earlier? The BMA union representatives was worried about the doctors prior to that as a parent had said they were going to report the doctors to the GMC, and the union representatives from the BMA only really got involved later on when LL had put in a grievance about the doctors and a meeting was held. They only seem to action anything when they themselves are being threatened- what stopped them proactively seeking out support?

https://thirlwall.public-inquiry.uk/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/Thirlwall-Inquiry-8-October-2024.pdf

Is there any way to cross reference Dr. Tighe's recollection that a patient's parents wanted to report some doctors to the GMC? Because that would be interesting. As stated here Ian Harvey testified that Letby's parents wanted to make a referral, and Dr. Tighe says he recalls differently but also that he might have been confused. I would love to see corroboration from paperwork or even one other person's testimony. Does anyone know if that exists? @Tortoise?

 

[Tortoise]

Is there any way to cross reference Dr. Tighe's recollection that a patient's parents wanted to report some doctors to the GMC? Because that would be interesting. As stated here Ian Harvey testified that Letby's parents wanted to make a referral, and Dr. Tighe says he recalls differently but also that he might have been confused. I would love to see corroboration from paperwork or even one other person's testimony. Does anyone know if that exists? @Tortoise?

It appears to have been Letby's father who was threatening to report them to the GMC, not a parent. I think Dr Tighe is right that he was not remembering that correctly -

A. No, I got the impression that it was one of the parents -- the parents of the -- of the children that had threatened GMC action. I wasn't aware that Ms Letby or her father had threatened to do so, although I might be not remembering that correctly. It might well have been the other way round, as you say. I don't know.


This is the testimony of Susan Hodkinson, present at the meeting -

Q. I mean his attitude, do you agree, was that Lucy Letby was coming back and if the doctors didn't like it, they would be gone?

A. I don't think that was -- I think also in that particular meeting and in the conversations I had had with Mr Letby he was adamant about the feeling for the doctors. He was wanting to refer them to the GMC. I think Tony was trying to manage that in the meeting as well.

https://thirlwall.public-inquiry.uk...024/11/Thirlwall-Inquiry-26-November-2024.pdf

And Ian Harvey's testimony -

Q. Well, we will come to the threats from the GMC. But what did you understand they were before we go to documents?

A. Sorry?

Q. What do you understand, who was threatened with the GMC, by whom?

A. Dr Brearey and Dr Jayaram were threatened with the GMC by Letby's father.

https://thirlwall.public-inquiry.uk...024/12/Thirlwall-Inquiry-29-November-2024.pdf

 

[joltz]

so if the doctors were allready been reported to the gmc by the parents they had a very good reason to want to shift the blame unto somone else

<modsnip: Personalizing toward other members is not allowed>

What is your opinion on the management, who the consultants went to with their concerns on numerous occasions, and whose professional duty it was, to take action?

 

[Ruthbullock]

Is there any way to cross reference Dr. Tighe's recollection that a patient's parents wanted to report some doctors to the GMC? Because that would be interesting. As stated here Ian Harvey testified that Letby's parents wanted to make a referral, and Dr. Tighe says he recalls differently but also that he might have been confused. I would love to see corroboration from paperwork or even one other person's testimony. Does anyone know if that exists? @Tortoise?

Yes if you search the Thirwell inquiry document link above - my phone won’t allow me to select and paste sections from the documents on that site- so it’s a screenshot or the whole document I can currently share

 

[Ruthbullock]

It appears to have been Letby's father who was threatening to report them to the GMC, not a parent. I think Dr Tighe is right that he was not remembering that correctly -

A. No, I got the impression that it was one of the parents -- the parents of the -- of the children that had threatened GMC action. I wasn't aware that Ms Letby or her father had threatened to do so, although I might be not remembering that correctly. It might well have been the other way round, as you say. I don't know.


This is the testimony of Susan Hodkinson, present at the meeting -

Q. I mean his attitude, do you agree, was that Lucy Letby was coming back and if the doctors didn't like it, they would be gone?

A. I don't think that was -- I think also in that particular meeting and in the conversations I had had with Mr Letby he was adamant about the feeling for the doctors. He was wanting to refer them to the GMC. I think Tony was trying to manage that in the meeting as well.

https://thirlwall.public-inquiry.uk...024/11/Thirlwall-Inquiry-26-November-2024.pdf

And Ian Harvey's testimony -

Q. Well, we will come to the threats from the GMC. But what did you understand they were before we go to documents?

A. Sorry?

Q. What do you understand, who was threatened with the GMC, by whom?

A. Dr Brearey and Dr Jayaram were threatened with the GMC by Letby's father.

https://thirlwall.public-inquiry.uk...024/12/Thirlwall-Inquiry-29-November-2024.pdf

Thanks for doing what I can’t Tortoise- it’s much easier to compare with snippets

 

[Ruthbullock]

<modsnip: Personalizing toward other members is not allowed>

What is your opinion on the management, who the consultants went to with their concerns on numerous occasions, and whose professional duty it was, to take action?

It appears they did take more action than we originally were led to believe- it’s just the reports redacted information about LL. Which is the correct way to handle those sorts of things- but the reports found no evidence to substantiate the doctors complaints. As a due process it’s hard to see what else they should have done, but hopefully that will be advised and be part of the outcome from the inquiry.
Personally though if I was in the doctors shoes- I would have been getting the union involved from the very first complaint, so I struggle to understand why they didn’t- they also have the ability to access a union rep from a different hospital if they feel that due process isn’t being followed- but they did none of that. If I had the strength of belief that we are being led to believe about what was going on during that time scale- I would also be making sure every process and medical note (especially for my own practices) were always accurately recorded and overly detailed to cover my own back and gather any evidence I could to support my own belief- but again it seems they didn’t do that either.

 

[mrC]

the chester standard has a good timeline here Recap: Lucy Letby trial, Wednesday, October 19

 

[JosieJo]

I completely understand the restraint with jumping straight to the police- I’m curious what logical reason they may have had for not getting the union involved, until a parent (not LL threatened to report a doctor to the GMC) and why they didn’t go to the trusts own safe guarding board until spring 2017.
ETA- everyone who has worked is aware there are official ways to do things, but if you aren’t listened to there will be documented unofficial ways of escalating something of this importance your union rep being the first port of call

Have you read anything on when the parents were threatening to ho to gmc at all? As in what point in relation to the LL timeline? As that could be quite important

Sorry just read that he would be mistaken..edited

 

[JosieJo]

I can only speak from experience..many years experience..in middle management of the NHS.
The directors would almost certainly have wanted to keep the fact that a nurse may be harming babies well under wraps until they were as sure as they could be.
With any problem in the NHS the wheels of action turn extremely slowly...and as disgusting as it sounds this situation would be no different.
They would not want to involve any outside agency be it police , union , BMA etc until they had no choice.

The NHS is now run as a "business" with senior directors as ruthless and caring only for their jobs as anyone running any huge manufacturing company.
At that level patients are numbers not people

 

[mrC]

they would of also wanted to keep it quite if incompetent doctors were killing babies

 

[JosieJo]

they would of also wanted to keep it quite if incompetent doctors were killing babies

They would ...but there is no evidence that this was presented to the Directors

Plus all the babies were cared for by a variety of consultants...not one ...and numerous different registrar's and junior Dr's

The standard of care from the medics was likely no different to any other level 2 Neonatal units across the country...what was different was a huge jump in unexpected deaths

 

[mrC]

from the telgraph Lucy Letby hospital outlines 15 reasons why ‘baby killer’ was innocent

 

[Ruthbullock]

Have you read anything on when the parents were threatening to ho to gmc at all? As in what point in relation to the LL timeline? As that could be quite important

Sorry just read that he would be mistaken..edited

I will have a look to see if any of the parents in the inquiry mentioned referrals- but it will be after work

 

[marynnu]

they would of also wanted to keep it quite if incompetent doctors were killing babies

So would the doctors, to be fair.

 

[Parker Knoll]

What happened to the “ if you don’t laugh you will cry “ emoji ?
It’s needed on this thread atm !

 

[mrC]

this what the patholdist thought Pathologist found ‘clear cut’ pneumonia in one of Lucy Letby’s victims

 

[Ruthbullock]

This is the clearest and easiest to digest breakdown (although lengthy) about how the whole process unfolded within the hospital- albeit from one point of view. One short section of it that is a summary of is in the screenshot- it’s given me a really good overview of all the various protocols and avenues that were available to whistleblowers.

https://thirlwall.public-inquiry.uk/wp-content/uploads/thirlwall-evidence/INQ0107036.pdf